i

The Tournament and its Role in the Court Culture of

Emperor Maximilian I (1459-1519)

Natalie Margaret Anderson

Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

The University of Leeds, Institute for Medieval Studies

March 2017

ii

The candidate confirms that the work submitted is her own and that appropriate credit has

been given where reference has been made to the work of others.

This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no

quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement.

© 2017 The University of Leeds and Natalie Margaret Anderson

The right of Natalie Margaret Anderson to be identified as Author of this work has been

asserted by Natalie Margaret Anderson in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents

Act 1988.

iii

Acknowledgements

I must first acknowledge the help and support of my supervisors, Dr Alan V. Murray and Dr

Karen Watts. They have been there since the beginning when I took part in their

‘Tournaments’ module during my MA studies, which first introduced me to the fantastical

world of Maximilian’s tournaments. They also helped me to craft the idea for this research

project while I was still exploring the exciting but daunting prospect of undertaking a PhD.

Their words of advice, patience, and sometimes much-needed prodding over the past four

years helped to bring about this thesis. Thank you as well to my examiners, Professor Stephen

Alford and Professor Maria Hayward, whose insights helped to greatly improve this thesis.

Thank you to the University of Leeds, whose funding in the form of a Leeds

International Research Scholarship made this research possible. Research grants from the

Extraordinary Postgraduate Fund in the School of History, Leeds, as well as from the Royal

Historical Society have also made travel to various conferences possible.

During this time, I have been exceptionally fortunate to have access to all of the

wonderful resources available at the Royal Armouries in Leeds. Their tournament arms and

armour collection, as well as their library, have proven incredibly useful. I would particularly

like to thank Stuart Ivinson from the library for his assistance over the years and for the

numerous trips to fetch various Turnierbücher for me.

Thank you also to Dr Romedio Schmitz-Esser for his help and guidance in Munich, as

well as to Dr Jörg Schwarz, who gave me the opportunity to visit several important sites in

Innsbruck. To Prof. Dr Hiram Kümper of the University of Mannheim for inviting me to

speak to his students and enabling me to see the Maximilian exhibit at the Reiss-Engelhorn

Museum. To Dr Cornelia Linde of the German Historical Institute for introducing me to some

great opportunities at the GHI. To Dr Gloria Allaire of the University of Kentucky, for her

iv

vote of confidence in inviting me to step in as plenary speaker at the ICLS Congress in 2016

and her assistance in getting me there. And to Dr Stefan Krause of the Kunsthistorisches

Museum for his time and assistance in Vienna.

I would also like to thank all the citizens of the Institute for Medieval Studies – the

faculty, staff, and students. I have made some wonderful friends here over the years who made

the PhD journey, with all its ups and downs, an unforgettable and often joyous experience.

Thank you to Dr Melanie Brunner for all the helpful coffee and conversation. In particular, to

the members of Alan’s ‘Fight Club’: the opportunity to share research and insight, chat, and

drink wine with you has been one of my highlights.

To my parents, Bob and Roberta Anderson: your unquestioning and unswerving belief

in my medieval dreams over the (many) years can never be repaid. To my aunt Peggy and uncle

Marty, for all your unrepayable support. To Ian and Bronwen McGregor, for taking in a poor

PhD student. And to Iolo, my partner in adventures.

v

Abstract

This thesis is an extensive and interdisciplinary study of the tournaments of Holy Roman

Emperor Maximilian I (1459-1519). It draws upon material, literary, narrative, and visual

sources to create a holistic view of what the late medieval German tournament looked like in

the court of Maximilian. Its scope includes the types of tournaments held, historical context

and influences, the network of participants, the environment, the practicalities, and the

symbolism. It also invesitagates Maximilian’s influence on the tournament at this time, and its

role in shaping his legacy.

At its heart, by examining various narrative sources, this thesis presents a chronological

study of the primary tournaments in which Maximilian was involved during his lifetime. Using

this study, the thesis explores the various styles of joust practiced at the tournament under

Maximilian, and the arms and armour, as well as decorative elements, employed in each.

Finally, it explores the role of the tournament specifically as it pertained to Maximilian’s courtly

culture.

This thesis makes use of an unprecedented range of sources in presenting its findings.

By drawing upon extant Maximilian-related tournament arms and armour, as well as visual

depictions of his tournaments, alongside both fictional and real-life accounts of these events,

new information may be gathered which brings to light previously unexplored findings and

draws connections which have not before been made.

This research demonstrates the central role which tournaments played during

Maximilian’s reign. It attempts to categorise and catalogue the numerous styles of joust which

the emperor promoted by analysing their distinct features. Further, it reveals his influence

upon them and, in turn, theirs upon him, through the crafting of his memory in the form of

public spectacle and various literary and artistic works.

vi

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................... iii

Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ v

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................. vi

List of Tables and Figures ................................................................................................................ ix

A Note on Spellings .......................................................................................................................... xi

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1

0.1 Research Aims .......................................................................................................................... 1

0.2 Historiography .......................................................................................................................... 5

0.3 Research Questions and Thesis Outline .............................................................................12

Chapter 1: Sources for Tournament Culture in the Time of Maximilian I ..............................16

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................16

1.2 Narrative Sources ...................................................................................................................16

1.2.a Maximilian through the Eyes of His Contemporaries ................................................... 19

1.3 Visual Sources ........................................................................................................................32

1.3 Maximilian’s Personal Works ...............................................................................................39

1.5 Material Culture ......................................................................................................................46

1.6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................46

Chapter 2: Tournaments in the Life and Career of Maximilian .................................................48

2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................48

2.2 The Burgundian Inheritence and Influences .....................................................................50

2.3 Archduke of Austria and King of the Romans .................................................................65

2.4 Maximilian as Emperor and the Establishment of Tournaments in his Court ............73

2.5 A New Century and Consolidation of Power ....................................................................91

2.6 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 102

Chapter 3: The Language of the Tournament and Varieties of the Joust ............................. 106

3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 106

3.2 Tournament Terminology and the Difficulties of Translation .................................... 107

3.2.a The Etymology of Gestech and Rennen ............................................................................. 109

3.2.b The Trouble with ‘Joust of War’ and ‘Joust of Peace’ ................................................. 111

3.2.c Primary Source Variation ................................................................................................. 114

vii

3.3. The Tourney ........................................................................................................................ 119

3.3.a The Kolbenturnier ................................................................................................................. 121

3.4 The Gestech ............................................................................................................................ 123

3.4.a The Deutschgestech ............................................................................................................... 123

3.4.b The Welschgestech ................................................................................................................ 124

3.4.c The Hohenzeuggestech .......................................................................................................... 128

3.4.d The Gestech im Beinharnisch ................................................................................................ 129

3.5 The Rennen ............................................................................................................................ 131

3.5.a The Welschrennen ................................................................................................................ 133

3.5.b The Geschiftrennen ............................................................................................................... 134

3.5.c The Scheibenrennen .............................................................................................................. 135

3.5.d The Schweifrennen ................................................................................................................ 135

3.5.e The Bundrennen ................................................................................................................... 136

3.5.f The Feldrennen ..................................................................................................................... 138

3.5.g The Wulstrennen .................................................................................................................. 139

3.5.h The Pfannenrennen .............................................................................................................. 140

3.6 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 141

Chapter 4: Tournament Equipment – Practical......................................................................... 145

4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 145

4.2 Arms and Armour for the Rennen and the Gestech ........................................................... 147

4.2.a The Lance and Vamplate ................................................................................................. 150

4.2.b The Shield .......................................................................................................................... 153

4.2.c The Helmet ........................................................................................................................ 155

4.2.d The Harness ...................................................................................................................... 156

4.3 Equestrian Armour ............................................................................................................. 157

4.4 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 159

Chapter 5: Tournament Equipment – Decorative .................................................................... 166

5.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 166

5.2 The Caparison ...................................................................................................................... 169

5.3 The Lance ............................................................................................................................. 176

5.4 The Shield ............................................................................................................................. 178

viii

5.5 The Crest .............................................................................................................................. 181

5.6 Decorations in the Lists ..................................................................................................... 185

5.7 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 188

Chapter 6: The Place of Tournaments in Maximilian’s Court Culture .................................. 190

6.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 190

6.2 Tournament Occasions ...................................................................................................... 194

6.2.a Fastnacht Tournaments ...................................................................................................... 194

6.2.b Celebratory Occasions ..................................................................................................... 197

6.2.c Political Occasions ............................................................................................................ 199

6.2.d Recreational Occasions .................................................................................................... 204

6.3 Tournament Accompaniments and Consequences ....................................................... 205

6.3.a Courtly Trappings .............................................................................................................. 206

6.3.b Violence and Injuries ........................................................................................................ 210

6.4 Maximilian and his Tournament Network ...................................................................... 215

6.4.a Maximilian as Tournament Participant .......................................................................... 216

6.4.b Maximilian’s Tournament Network ............................................................................... 219

6.4.c Maximilian and his Fictional Tournaments ................................................................... 225

6.5 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 231

Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 235

Appendix 1: Images ....................................................................................................................... 245

Appendix 2: Glossary .................................................................................................................... 264

Appendix 3: Extant Maximilian Tournament Armours ........................................................... 268

Bibliography .................................................................................................................................... 279

Primary Sources ......................................................................................................................... 279

Secondary Sources ..................................................................................................................... 287

ix

List of Tables and Figures

Tables

Table 1: Combatants in Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398.......................................................................38

Table 2: Maximilian’s Tournaments Chronology............................................................................104

Table 3: A Selection of Tournament Terminology.........................................................................119

Table 4: Tournament Arms and Armour in the 1519 Augsburg Inventory................................161

Table 5: Equestrian Armour in the 1519 Augsburg Inventory......................................................164

Table 6: Crests in the 1519 Augsburg Inventory.............................................................................185

Table 7: Maximilian’s Itinerary, 1494.................................................................................................192

Figures

Figure 1: Map of Maximilian’s Holy Roman Empire......................................................................245

Figure 2: Maximilian’s Lehrbuch...........................................................................................................246

Figure 3: Jousting Figurines in Weißkunig..........................................................................................246

Figure 4: Tourneyers in the Triumphzug.............................................................................................247

Figure 5: Tourneyers in the Turnierbuch of Ludwig von Eyb..........................................................247

Figure 6: Tourneyers in the Turnierbuch of Marx Walther...............................................................248

Figure 7: Tourneyers in BSB, Cod.icon 398.....................................................................................248

Figure 8: The Deutschgestech in the Triumphzug...................................................................................249

Figure 9: The Welschgestech in Freydal...................................................................................................249

Figure 10: The Welschgestech in the Triumphzug..................................................................................250

Figure 11: The Hohes Zeug....................................................................................................................250

Figure 12: The Hohenzeuggestech in Freydal..........................................................................................251

Figure 13: The Hohenzeuggestech in the Triumphzug............................................................................251

Figure 14: The Gestech im Beinharnisch in the Triumphzug..................................................................252

Figure 15: The Welschrennen in the Triumphzug..................................................................................252

Figure 16: The Geschiftrennen in the Triumphzug.................................................................................253

Figure 17: The Scheibenrennen in the Triumphzug................................................................................253

Figure 18: The Schweifrennen in the Triumphzug..................................................................................254

Figure 19: The Bundrennen in the Triumphzug.....................................................................................254

Figure 20: The Feldrennen in the Triumphzug......................................................................................255

x

Figure 21: The Wulstrennen in the Triumphzug....................................................................................255

Figure 22: The Pfannenrennen in the Triumphzug.................................................................................256

Figure 23: The Rennzeug........................................................................................................................256

Figure 24: The Stechzeug........................................................................................................................257

Figure 25: A Rennzeug Backplate.........................................................................................................257

Figure 26: Mechanical Breastplate for the Rennen............................................................................258

Figure 27: Gasper Lamberger’s Personal Emblem..........................................................................258

Figure 28: Child’s Jousting Toy on a Caparison...............................................................................259

Figure 29: The Lock and Key Caparisons in the Turnierbuch of Wilhelm IV...............................259

Figure 30: The Margrave Friedrich of Brandenburg and his Servant Jousting...........................260

Figure 31: Young Boy on a Lance in the Turnierbuch of Marx Walther........................................260

Figure 32: Fabric-Draped Shields in BSB, Cod.icon 398...............................................................261

Figure 33: Marx Walther Wearing a Skewer of Sausages Crest.....................................................261

Figure 34: Gaspar Lamberger Wearing a Basket of Cats Crest.....................................................262

Figure 35: Marx Walther and his Attendants in a Tournament.....................................................262

Figure 36: A Romantic Image of the Tournament of Worms.......................................................263

xi

A Note on Spellings

In this thesis, the often various Early New High German (subsequently ENHG) spellings of

the names of the nobles of Maximilian’s court have been updated to their modern German

versions. Additionally, all titles, where possible, will be rendered in their common English

translations, as will place names. The German name ‘Friedrich’ is used when describing all

people of that name except for Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III, as this is how he is

universally known in English scholarship.

1

Introduction

0.1 Research Aims

We should then talk of another pursuit at which many men-at-arms aim to make their reputation: that is at deeds of arms at tournaments. And indeed, they earn men praise and esteem for they require a great deal of wealth, equipment and expenditure, physical hardship, crushing and wounding, and sometimes danger of death. For this kind of practice of arms, there are some whose physical strength, skill, and agility enable them to perform so well that they achieve in this activity such great renown for their fine exploits; and because they often engage in it, their renown and their fame increases in their own territory and that of their neighbours; thus they want to continue this kind of pursuit of arms because of the success God has granted them in it. They content themselves with this particular practice of arms because of the acclaim they have already won and still expect to win from it. Indeed they are worthy of praise; nevertheless he who does more is of greater worth.1

The medieval tournament and the mental images which it inspires – armoured knights on

horseback, dramatically splintering lances, ladies bestowing favours from the sidelines – are

central to the modern conception of the Middle Ages. It is a cultural touchstone, familiar to

both its original audiences and its contemporary mytholigisers, and it encapsulates the often

contradictory combination of lofty chivalric ideals and martial violence which helped to define

the era. One figure who bridged the gap between the medieval and modern ideal of the

tournament was Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I (1459-1519). Maximilian’s reputation, in

his own lifetime and and beyond, was built in many ways around the tournament. The aim of

this thesis is to examine the significance of the tournament during the lifetime of Maximilian I

1 Geoffroi de Charny, The Book of Chivalry of Geoffroi de Charny: Text, Context, and Translation, ed. by Richard Kaeuper and Elspeth Kennedy (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996), p. 48.

2

and his reign as king of the Romans and, later, as Holy Roman emperor.2 It will analyse the

tournament’s role in his court, its place in the representation of his rule, and its practical reality

while also investigating the tournament as a form of entertainment, military display, and public

promotion. The study of tournaments is a well-established field, and the life and political

interests of Emperor Maximilian have also been examined in several different contexts. Yet,

while many aspects of Maximilian’s reign have been comprehensively researched, little effort

has been made to investigate the place of tournaments in his life and political career.

In the above passage, the French knight and noted author on chivalry Geoffroi de

Charny (c. 1300-1356) articulated both the risk and the appeal of the tournament which

gripped men throughout the Middle Ages. At the tournament, men had the chance to win

fame and renown, as well as financial rewards, while also immersing themselves in the chivalric

ethos of the time.3 The tournament space, whether it was wide-ranging open fields or narrow,

enclosed lists, was a distinct environment in which men could act out the motions of warfare

without (normally) the consequences of it.

In Maximilian’s Holy Roman Empire, the joust on horseback with lance as a

competition of skill between two individuals had risen in prominence and popularity, as it had

across much of Europe. However, the mêlée-style competition, known as a tourney in English,

in which two groups of competitors fought against each other, either as individuals or in

2 It should here be noted that this thesis will focus primarily on the joust and its role in Maximilian’s tournaments. Although Maximilian also participated in and promoted foot combat in the tournament, and passing reference to this form of combat will be included here, this is largely outside the scope of this thesis. The addition of the subject of Maximilian’s foot combats could easily supply enough material to double the size of the current study.

3 For more on the development of the tournament in medieval Germany and its transition from military practice to recreational pursuit, see Josef Fleckenstein, ‘Das Turnier als höfisches Fest im hochmittelalterlichen Deutschland’ in Das ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter, ed. by Josef Fleckenstein (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), pp. 229-56.

3

teams, was still popular in several forms.4 Yet this form undeniably lacked the glamour and

prestige that came with the joust, as the joust allowed two individual competitors to show off

their martial skills in a one-on-one setting rather than getting lost in the crowd of a tourney. In

the medieval German-speaking territories, different forms of the joust, itself just one possible

style of competition found at a tournament, were given specific names, and each had their own

rules and their own style of armour. The joust itself existed in two main forms: the Gestech and

the Rennen.5

An insight into the world of the German tournament at the time of Maximilian may be

gained through an understanding of its ideal and its practical reality, as this thesis will explore.

During this time, for example, there was ‘a considerable overlap between concepts of chivalry

in peace and war’, and the tournament was where one could attain reputation and honour

outside the battlefield. Success when linked with gentlemanly conduct brought respect, and

Larry Silver points out that, in the literature that remains detailing Maximilian’s exploits,

military victory often overlapped with tournament victory in this respect (i.e. victory in one

arena was as worthy of renown as victory in the other).6 Beyond literature, this attitude further

carried over into the realm of arms and armour, which were produced in plenty for

Maximilian, and were sometimes made to be interchangeable between tournament and

4 For the purposes of this thesis, I shall refer to the group competitions on horseback as ‘tourneys’ (plural), or ‘tourney’ (singular). Mêlée, being a French term, was never used by any German sources contemporary to Maximilian to describe group combat at a tournament. Rather, some form of the noun Turnier was most frequently used (often in a compound form). Although the most common English translation of this word is ‘tournament’, Stanley Appelbaum, in his edition of the Triumphzug, uses ‘tourneyers’ to describe the knights depicted as taking part in group combat, and I believe this is the most useful translation: The Triumph of Maximilian: 137 Woodcuts by Hans Burgkmair and Others, ed. and trans. by Stanley Applebaum (New York: Dover Publications, 1964), p. 7.

5 Each of these three broad forms of tournament competition – the tourney, the Gestech, and the Rennen – and their various sub-forms, will be considered in-depth in Chapter 3.

6 Larry Silver, Marketing Maximilian: The Visual Ideology of a Holy Roman Emperor, pp. 147-58 (p. 147). Silver further adds that, ‘The interplay between serious play within tournaments and life-and-death combats in battle thus renders the value of jousting […] more essential’ (p. 148).

4

battlefield, but more and more were designed exclusively for the joust. When not at war, after

all, tournaments were (along with hunting) Maximilian’s chief leisure activity. Given this close

connection Maximilian had to tournaments in both his daily life and his literary activity, it is

perhaps little surprise that the Rennen and the Gestech which emerged in Germany should be

worthy of closer investigation.7

Thus Maximilian found himself at this interesting crossroads of the tournament, and

those with which he was involved, as will be shown, perfectly demonstrate this. In many ways,

his tournaments embody the most lavish forms of spectacle which could be found in such late

medieval events. The influence of Burgundy, in particular, may clearly be seen in these

elements – a theme which will be explored. Yet Maximilian’s tournaments managed to do this

while retaining some of the intensity and violence of the competitions of earlier centuries.

Certainly, with regard to the above de Charny quote, Maximilian could safely be called ‘he who

does more’.

The present study will fill in a critical research gap regarding Maximilian’s lifetime and

the study of tournaments by exploring the ways in which he used the tournament in his own

court, where it held as much weight as any of his other political and cultural achievements. It is

meant to show how often Maximilian, even as one of the most powerful rulers of Europe,

risked his safety participating in such events – and he did suffer injuries – and his noted skill in

doing so; to show the role he also might play as a spectator and how he utilised the

tournament as not just a festive occasion but a political tool; to give an idea of the most

common reasons for which and times of year at which Maximilian would hold tournaments, as

7 Of course, at this time, Germany did not exist as a country. For the purposes of this thesis, however, ‘German’ may be used as an adjective to describe the tournament customs and regulations unique to Maximilian’s court as a way to denote its cultural distinctness.

5

well as illustrate their frequency; to shed light on some of the technical details involved in such

occasions and emphasise some of those who competed alongside Maximilian; finally, to

highlight the other elements which came alongside a tournament and the events which most

often accompanied them.

0.2 Historiography

Both the study of Maximilian I and of medieval tournaments are ones which have been

conducted in various and thorough ways by numerous scholars over the years, yet the two

have never been sufficiently brought together. Indeed, as will be discussed, Maximilian’s reign

and court culture has been analysed through several different lenses, yet a comprehensive study

of the tournaments of his court has not been conducted. The tournament is often mentioned –

or plays a small role – in studies of Maximilian, but it has not received the full attention which

it deserves. Not only does an examination of the tournament and Maximilian add substantially

to our understanding of Maximilian as a ruler, but, at the same time, it also contributes greatly

to overall scholarship on the medieval tournament.

When it comes to Maximilian, this late medieval ruler has, comparared to some of his

contemporaries, been the subject of relatively few straightforward biographies. Instead,

scholars have often preferred to focus on one aspect of his reign or to study another cultural

phenomenon as it was reflected by Maximilian. The most comprehensive biography of the

emperor is undoubtedly Hermann Wiesflecker’s five-volume opus, which covers the entirety of

Maximilian’s life in great detail.8 An earlier, nineteenth century biography by Heinrich Ulmann,

8 Hermann Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, 5 vols (Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1971-1986). A later work by Wiesflecker, Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches (Vienna: Verlag für Geschichte und Politik, 1991), presents essentially the same biographical information but condensed into a single volume.

6

while not as exhaustive and more dated, is also very thorough.9 Maximilian’s youth has been

the subject of a partial biography by Heinrich Fichtenau, which covers Maximilian’s life until

1482.10 Other more recent and fairly simplistic biographical studies include works by Ernst

Wies, Manfred Hollegger, and Sigrid-Maria Größing.11

As this range of literature demonstrates, most scholarship on Maximilian has been

published in German. Even fewer biographies of him exist in English. Indeed, the closest to a

modern biography of Maximilian is probably Gerhard Benecke’s Maximilian I (1459-1519): An

Analytical Biography, which does not follow the emperor’s life chronologically, but rather jumps

around thematically in an often confusing manner and is fairly slight, especially compared to

the scope of Wiesflecker.12 Prior to this, R.W. Seton-Watson published an English language

biography of Maximilian in 1902.13 Beyond Benecke, probably the most useful general portrait

of Maximilian may be found in Glen Waas’ study of his character.14 Although, like Benecke,

this is not a straightforward biography but a survey of how Maximilian was viewed in

contemporary literature, it still contains much useful information on the emperor.

9 Heinrich Ulmann, Kaiser Maximilian I: Auf urkundlicher Grundlage dargestellt, 2 vols (Stuttgart: J.G. Cotta, 1884-1891).

10 Heinrich Fichtenau, Der Junge Maximilian (1459-1482) (Vienna: Verlag für Geschichte und Politik, 1959). Fichtenau covers Maximilian’s childhood and education in Wiener Neustadt, his marriage to Mary of Burgundy, and his time in the Netherlands.

11 Sigrid-Maria Größing, Maximilian I.: Kaiser, Künstler, Kämpfer (Vienna: Amalthea Signum Verlag, 2002); Manfred Hollegger, Maximilian I. (1459-1519): Herrscher und Mensch einer Zeitenwende (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer GmbH, 2005); Ernst W. Wies, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Ein Charakterbild (Munich: Bechtle Verlag, 2003). Größing’s work is a thorough but simple biography of Maximilian, with rather sensationalist chapter titles such as ‘Kurzer schöner Traum in Burgund’ and ‘Bianca Maria Sforza – die arme reiche Braut’. Hollegger and Wies offer more academic but brief summaries of Maximilian’s life, with Wies making particularly good use of letters.

12 Gerhard Benecke, Maximilian I (1459-1519): An Analytical Biography (London: Routledge, 1982). 13 R.W. Seton-Watson, Maximilian I, Holy Roman Emperor (London: Archibald Constable & Co.

Ltd, 1902). 14 Glenn Elwood Waas, The Legendary Character of Kaiser Maximilian (New York: Columbia

University Press, 1941).

7

Rather than as the subject of a direct biographical study, Maximilian’s life has often

been examined in terms of what it reveals about larger historical trends. Sometimes these may

touch on tournaments, but not to any great extent. Music at Maximilian’s court, for instance,

has been the subject of select studies. Louise Cuyler, among others, has focused her work on

the music of Maximilian’s court, which would also have played a role at tournaments, yet

Cuyler does not expand upon this connection.15 In terms of courtly culture, tournaments are of

equal importance to both art and music, being another outlet for displaying power and wealth.

Indeed, the three are interconnected in many ways, as music would have been featured at

tournaments and art used to chronicle them. Yet the tournament has not received equal

attention to the other two. This project will expand upon current scholarship relating to both

tournaments and Maximilian’s reign, while combining the two in a way which has not

previously been done.

Studies of Maximilian’s court culture in general, and his connection with specific cities,

especially Innsbruck, have also been conducted.16 The recent collected volume Kaiser

Maximilian I. (1459-1519) und die Hofkultur seiner Zeit (2009) was entirely devoted to approaching

the topic a variety of ways.17 Additionally, Maximilian’s love of hunting – his other favoured

15 Louise Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music (London: Oxford University Press, 1973). Other examples include Walter Salmen, ed., Musik und Tanz zur Zeit Kaiser Maximilian I (Innsbruck: Edition Helbling, 1992), and Helen Green, ‘Meetings of City and Court: Music and Ceremony in the Imperial Cities of Maximilian I’, in Kaiser Maximilian I. (1459-1519) und die Hofkultur seiner Zeit, ed. by Sieglinde Hartmann and others (Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2009), Jahrbuch der Oswald von Wolkenstein-Gesellschaft 17 for 2008-2009, pp. 261-74.

16 Nicole Riegel, ‘Bausteine eines Residenzprojekts. Kaiser Maximilian I. in Innsbruck’, in The Habsburgs and their Courts in Europe, 1400-1700: Between Cosmopolitan and Regionalism, ed. by Herbert Karner, Ingrid Ciulisová, and Bernardo J. García García (Palatium e-Publicaion: www.courtresidences.eu, 2014), pp. 28-45 and Inge Wiesflecker-Friedhuber, ‘Kaiser Maximilian I. und die Stadt Innsbruck’, in Der Innsbrucker Hof: Residenz und höfische Gesellschaft in Tirol vom 15. bis 19. Jahrhundert, ed. by Heinz Noflatscher and Jan Paul Niederkorn (Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2005), pp. 125-58.

17 Hartmann, ed., Kaiser Maximilian I. (1459-1519) und die Hofkultur seiner Zeit. Topics explored include art, religion, memorialisation, the Habsburg dynasty, and Maximilian’s marriages.

8

recreational pastime next to tournaments – has been explored.18 Darin Hayton has even

examined the role astrology played in Maximilian’s court.19 However, the foremost authority

on the subject of Maximilian’s court life is most likely Jan-Dirk Müller, who still continues to

contribute valuable scholarship in this area. His 1982 monograph, Gedechtnus: Literatur und

Hofgesellschaft um Maximilian I., is a comprehensive and excellent examination of Maximilian’s

court and the power of literature within it.20

Probably the most frequently studied aspect of Maximilian’s reign is his art and literary

patronage, which have been the subject of multiple monographs, chapters, and articles. Larry

Silver, in particular, has studied Maximilian’s visual ideology through his art patronage, yet he

has not connected this to the powerful visual impact of the tournament and its reflection on

Maximilian as a monarch.21 Indeed, it is perhaps Maximilian’s impressive literary output and

close ties to famed artists such as Albrecht Dürer for which he is best remembered today, and

the topic has been thoroughly and admirably explored by a wide range of scholars.22 The most

18 Erwin Koller, ‘Jagdszenen aus Tirol: Maximilian I. auf Pirsch im Schmirn und anderswo’, in Literatur und Sprachkultur in Tirol, ed. by Johann Jolzner, Oskar Putzer, and Max Siller (Innsbruck: Inst. für Germanistik, 1997), pp. 265-72.

19 Darin Hayton, The Crown and the Cosmos: Astrology and the Politics of Maximilian I (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2015).

20 Jan-Dirk Müller, Gedechtnus: Literatur und Hofgesellschaft um Maximilian I. (Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1982). Other valuable contributions by Müller include ‘The Court of Emperor Maximilian I’, in Princes and Princely Culture: 1450-1650, ed. by Martin Gosman and others (Leiden: Brill, 2003), vol. 1, pp. 295-311; ‘Funktionswandel ritterlicher Epik am Ausgang des Mittelalter’, in Gesellschaftliche Sinnangebote mittelalterlicher Literature, ed. by Gert Kaiser (Munich: Wilhelm Fink, 1980), pp. 11-35; and the recent collected volume, co-edited with Hans-Joachim Ziegeler, Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I. (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015).

21 Larry Silver, Marketing Maximilian: The Visual Ideology of a Holy Roman Emperor; Larry Silver, ‘Shining Armor: Maximilian I as Holy Roman Emperor’, in Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies, 12 (1985), 8-29.

22 Other useful studies include Paul van Dyke, ‘The Literary Activity of the Emperor Maximilian I’, American Historical Review, 11 (1905), 16-28; Dagmar Eichberger, ‘Official Portraits and Regional Identities: The Case of Emperor Maximilian I (1459-1519)’, in The Habsburgs and their Courts in Europe, 1400-1700: Between Cosmopolitan and Regionalism, ed. by Herbert Karner, Ingrid Ciulisová, and Bernardo J. García García (Palatium e-Publication: www.courtresidences.eu, 2014), pp. 100-114; Joseph Strobl, Studien über die literarische Tätigkeit Kaiser Maximilian I. (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1913); Gerhild S. Williams,

9

recent work to examine Maximilian’s literary and artistic patronage and his attempts to become

the prototypical ‘Renaissance man’ is the volume Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und

Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I.23 Yet the close ties between Maximilian’s self-

fashioning and the critical role of the tournament within it are again overlooked here. Such

works, however, have laid an admirable groundwork upon which this current research has

been able to build.

Finally, far more research has been done on the medieval tournament than can be

adequately described here. It has been analysed based on time period, geographic setting, or

famous figures associated with it. In recent years, names such as Anglo, Barber, Crouch, Keen,

Muhlberger, and Vale have contributed in valuable ways to the field.24 Geographically oriented

studies of tournaments have skirted around Maximilian and his court without focusing fully on

it, which is surprising. Mario Damen has written engagingly on the tournament in Brussels and

the Low Countries.25 The tournaments of Maximilian’s inherited duchy of Burgundy have also

‘The Arthurian Model in Emperor Maximilian's Autobiographic Writings Weisskunig and Theuerdank’, The Sixteenth Century Journal, 11 (1980), 3-22.

23 Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I., ed. by Jan-Dirk Müller and Hans-Joachim Ziegler (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015).

24 For useful general background on the history of the tournament, see: Sydney Anglo, The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000); Richard Barber, The Knight and Chivalry, Revised Edition (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1995); David Crouch, Tournament (London: Hambledon and London, 2005); Maurice Keen, Chivalry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984). Additionally, Richard Barber and Juliet Barker, Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry and Pageants in the Middle Ages (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989) is an oft-cited but simplistic history of the tournament. An older and slightly romanticised but still thorough history is Coltman Clephan, The Tournament: Its Periods and Phases (London: Metheun & Co. Ltd, 1919).

25 See, for example, Mario Damen, ‘Tournament Culture in the Low Countries and England’, in Contact in Exchange in Later Medieval Europe. Essays in Honour of Malcolm Vale, ed. by Hannah Skoda and others (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2012), pp. 247-66; ‘The Town as a Stage? Urban Space and Tournaments in Late Medieval Brussells’ Urban History (February 2015), 1-25; and ‘The Town, the Duke, his Courtiers, and their Tournament. A Spectacle in Brussels, 4-7 May 1439’, in Staging the Court of Burgundy: Proceedings of the Conference ‘The Splendour of Burgundy’, ed. by Wim Blockmans and others (London: Harvey Miller Publishers, 2013), pp. 85-95.

10

been the subject of much study.26 It should also be noted that Noel Fallows’ superb recent

monograph on the tournament in medieval and Renaissance Iberia in fact drew heavily upon

German forms of the tournament within its research, despite the fact that this was not the

focus of his work.27 The same avoidance of the topic of Maximilian’s tournaments has also

occurred in the chronological scope of several studies. Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly, for example,

has produced a wide-ranging study of German tournaments in the early modern era, yet her

period of investigation (1560-1730) begins after Maximilian’s reign, thus cutting out his

substantial contribution.28

The area where the study of tournaments and of Maximilian intersect is relatively small,

both in quantity and in the extent of the outputs, which have been largely limited to articles

and chapters. No stand-alone monograph on the subject has been produced, thus the focus

has tended to be narrow, focusing on one area of the tournament alone. Dirk H. Breiding and

others have investigated admirably the arms and armour of Maximilian’s tournaments.29

26 See, for example, The Ideology of Burgundy: The Promotion of National Consciousness, 1364-1565, ed. by D’Arcy Jonathan Dacre Boulton and Jan R. Veenstra (Leiden: Brill, 2006); Sébastien Nadot, Le Spectacle des joutes: Sport et courtoisie à la fin du Moyen Âge (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2013); and Staging the Court of Burgundy: Proceedings of the Conference ‘The Splendour of Burgundy’, ed. by Wim Blockmans and others.

27 Noel Fallows, Jousting in Medieval and Renaissance Iberia (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2010). 28 Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly, Triumphall Shews: Tournaments and German-speaking Courts in their

European Context 1560-1730 (Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1992). In a similar vein is Braden Frieder, Chivalry and the Perfect Prince: Tournaments, Art, and Armor at the Spanish Habsburg Court (Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2008).

29 Dirk Breiding, ‘Rennen, Stechen und Turnier zur Zeit Kaiser Maximilians I.’, in ‘“Vor Halbtausend Jahren…” – Festschrift zur Erinnerung an den Besuch des Kaisers Maximilian I. in St. Wendel’ (St. Wendel: Stadtmuseum, 2012), pp. 53-84. See also Ortwin Gamber, ‘Der Turnierharnisch zur Zeit König Maximilians I. und das Thunsche Skizzenbuch’, Jahrbuch des kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, 53 (1957), 33-70; Helmut Nickel, with Dirk H. Breiding, ‘A Book of Tournaments and Parades from Nuremberg’, Metropolitan Museum Journal, 45 (2010), 125-86; Pierre Terjanian, ‘The Art of the Armorer in Late Medieval and Renaissance Augsburg: The Rediscovery of the Thun Sketchbooks’, Jahrbuch des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien 13/14 (2011/2012), pp. 299-321; Alan Williams, David Edge, Tobias Capwell, and Stefanie Tschegg, ‘A Technical Note on the Armour and Equipment for Jousting,’ Gladius: Estudios sobre armas antiguas, arte militar y vida cultural en oriente y occidente, 32 (2012), 139-84.

11

Matthias Pfaffenbichler, one of the current foremost authorities on Maximilian’s tournaments,

has focused, among other topics, on their role in Habsburg politics.30 William H. Jackson has

also looked briefly at German tournaments during Maximilian’s lifetime. Yet, with a focus

primarily on the tourneying societies of the German bourgeois elite and not the ruling nobility,

Jackson’s brief studies left many facets still unexplored.31 The collected volume Das ritterliche

Turnier im Mittelalter contains some of the most relevant modern scholarship on German

tournaments, yet none of the chapters are devoted solely to the topic of Maximilian’s

tournaments.32 Other works are only summaries of the essential facts.33

It must be said that the best and most extensive studies of the tournaments of

Maximilian’s court have actually come in the form of various museum exhibitions and their

accompanying catalogues.34 Such catalogues and their accompanying essays (many with

contributions from Pfaffenbichler) admirably begin to bring together the literature and arms

and armour in a constructive comparison to create an overall picture of these events. Yet these

30 Matthias Pfaffenbichler, ‘Das Turnier als Instrument der Habsburgischen Politik’, in Waffen und Kostümkunde, Zeitschrift für Waffen- und Kleidungsgeschichte 34/1-2 (1992), pp. 13-36.

31 William H. Jackson, ‘The Tournament and Chivalry in German Tournament Books of the Sixteenth Century and in the Literary Works of Emperor Maximilian I’, in The Ideals and Practice of Medieval Knighthood: Papers from the First and Second Strawberry Hill Conferences, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Ruth Harvey (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1986), pp. 49-73, and ‘Tournaments and the German Chivalric renovatio: Tournament Discipline and the Myth of Origins’, in Chivalry in the Renaissance, ed. by Sydney Anglo (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1990), pp. 77-91.

32 Das ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter, ed. by Josef Fleckenstein (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986).

33 Such as Peter Krenn, ‘Kaiser Maximilian I und das Turnierwesen seiner Zeit’ Mitteilungen des Steirischen Burgenvereines, 13 (1971), 5-18.

34 Recent examples include Emperor Maximilian I and the Age of Dürer, ed. by Eva Michel and Maria Luise Sternath (Munich: Prestel, 2012); Kaiser Maximilian I: Der letzte Ritter und das höfische Turnier, ed. by Sabine Haag, Alfried Wieczorek, Matthias Pfaffenbichler, and Hans-Jürgen Buderer (Regensburg: Schnell & Steiner, 2014); Maximilian I: Der Aufstieg eines Kaisers, von seiner Geburt bis zur Alleinherrschaft 1459-1493, ed. by Norbert Koppensteiner and others (Wiener Neustadt: Stadtmuseum, 2000); Ritterturnier: Geschichte einer Festkultur, ed. by Peter Jezler, Peter Niederhäuser, and Elke Jezler (Luzern: Quaternio, 2014); Ritterwelten im Spätmittelalter: Höfisch-ritterliche Kultur der Reichen Herzöge von Bayern-Landshut, ed. by Franz Niehoff (Landshut: Museen der Stadt Landshut, 2009).

12

also present only an outline. The full interdisciplinary scope of this subject has not been taken

advantage of – the printed, manuscript, artistic, and material sources have never yet been

brought together as they ought. That is what the present study will accomplish. By examining a

wide variety of primary sources, this thesis will endeavour to accomplish what prior studies

have not: to create a comprehensive picture of Maximilian’s tournaments while illuminating

their wider significance within his court and reign.

0.3 Research Questions and Thesis Outline

This thesis attempts to answer the questions: How frequently was Maximilian personally

involved in tournaments and in what capacity? What did the tournament look like in

Maximilian’s court? What forms did it take and how was it conducted? What did the arms and

armour used in the tournament look like and how was it uniquely suited to the event, as well as

what role did decorative elements such as textiles play? What role did the tournament play in

Maximilian’s court and what overall significance did it take on in the context of his reign? How

did Maximilian’s direct involvement in the tournament as a participant set him apart as a ruler?

Finally, what place does the tournament have in his legacy?

There is also the dilemma of terminology and determining what counts as a

‘tournament’. The definition which best serves the purpose of this thesis delineates the

tournament as the overarching event, within which various forms of jousts – between

individuals or large groups and using lances, swords, or clubs – as well as foot combat may

take place. However, as was often the case, numerous different jousts might take place over a

series of weeks, or even months, in the same location, and even all be centred on the same

event. During this time, Maximilian might participate frequently while also being a spectator at

other times. There is an often frustrating fluidity in the organisation and occurrence of

13

‘tournaments’ and the ‘jousts’ within them. If multiple jousts took place over several days as

part of a wedding celebration, did this make them all one tournament? The sources are unclear

on this and make no attempt to neatly delineate such events. The vocabulary used might label

one encounter a ‘tournament’ and one a ‘joust’ interchangeably. The language of the sources

also plays a significant role in the sort of terminology used. However, a concept of formally

defining what constituted a tournament never seemed to have bothered any of the writers who

chronicled them.

The first chapter of this thesis provides an overview and an analysis of the primary

sources used in the preparation of the current study. These are the sources for tournament

culture in the time of Maximilian I, and they are divided into four main categories: narrative,

visual, Maximilian’s personal works (that is, ones which he commissioned himself), and extant

material culture. The examination of narrative sources also take a closer look at how

Maximilian was viewed through the eyes of his contempories as a useful way of introducing

the sources, but, furthermore, these descriptions of the emperor by those who had firsthand

knowledge of him paint a picture of his character which, in turn, may inform the more narrow

investigation of solely his tournaments. The wide range of these sources, taken together, will

be used throughout this thesis to examine Maximilian’s tournaments from every angle.

The second chapter presents an in-depth study of how tournaments were interwoven

throughout Maximilian’s lifetime. It first examines Maximilian’s Burgundian inheritance and

likely influences before proceeding chronologically through the emperor’s life, combining

biographical details with details of the tournaments in which he was involved in some way.

This includes those tournaments which he organised, those in which he was a participant (i.e.

combatant), and those which he attended. Evidence for and descriptions of such tournaments

were found using various narrative, archival, and chronicle sources in an attempt to show the

14

wide range – chronologically, geographically, and stylistically – of tournaments with which

Maximilian was associated, for some of which there is extensive detail and for some barely a

passing mention. This chapter is divided by various periods of significance during Maximilian’s

life.

The third chapter provides an analysis of the specific types of joust named and

memorialised in various forms by Maximilian. It begins with a discussion of the tournament

terminology unique to Maximilian’s court and of some of the difficulties of translation when

writing about a uniquely German topic in English. It goes on to examine each style of joust

prevalent in Maximilian’s court by looking at how it was practiced in reality, as well as its

idealised form. The first of these is the tourney, or mêlée-style joust fought among a group of

men on horseback, the primary form of which practiced at Maximilian’s court was the

Kolbenturnier. The second form is the Gestech, which may be further divided into the sub-

categories of Deutschgestech, Welschgestech, Hohenzeuggestech, and Gestech im Beinharnisch. Finally,

there is the Rennen, which include the sub-categories of Welschrennen, Geschiftrennen,

Scheibenrennen, Schweifrennen, Bundrennen, Feldrennen, Wulstrennen, and Pfannenrennen.

The fourth chapter is closely tied with the fifth, the two of which make up a study of

the equipment required for a tournament in Maximilian’s court. The fourth chapter analyses

the practical equipment, i.e. the arms and armour. It does so by investigating what

differentiates the armour for the Rennen and the Gestech and inspecting the essential parts of

each: the lance and vamplate, the shield, the helmet, and the harness. Finally, it also discusses

the equestrian armour customary in the German tournament. Closely connected with this is

the fifth chapter, which presents a study of the decorative equipment used in Maximilian’s

tournaments: mainly, the ways in which textiles were utilised and their symbolism and

15

significance. The elements examined include the caparison, the lance, the shield, the crest, as

well as the forms of decoration found in the lists.

Finally, chapter six is an in-depth analysis of the role of the tournament in Maximilian’s

court which attempts to bring together the elements, themes, works, and events discussed in

previous chapters to create an all-encompassing picture of how the tournament affected

Maximilian’s reign. It does so by examining the primary occasions on which a tournament

might be held: namely, the Fastnacht period before Easter, as well as celebratory, political, or

recreational purposes. It also looks at some of the accompaniments of the tournament, such as

the plethora of courtly festivities surrounding them, as well some of the unintended, dangerous

consequences. Finally, it analyses Maximilian and his tournament network. This includes

Maximilian’s presence as a competitor in his own tournaments, the men most often to be

found competing alongside him, and his use of tournaments in fictional works in order to

increase his chivalric reputation.

This thesis also includes three appendices. The first is a collection of all the relevant

images referenced in this thesis. Notes indicating which image is being described will be

included in the body of each chapter. The second is a glossary of recurrent tournament-related

terms, both German and English, which appear in this thesis. The third is a catalogue of extant

tournament armour believed to have belonged to Maximilian.

16

Chapter 1: Sources for Tournament Culture in the Time of Maximilian I

1.1 Introduction

A wide variety of sources of many different types have been examined in the preparation of

this current study. As the subject is highly interdisciplinary in nature, an effort has been made

to closely examine each of the forms of evidence which survive relating to Maximilian’s

tournaments and to compare and synthesise them in a way which has not previously been

done. These sources may be generally divided into four categories: narrative, visual (both print

and manuscript), Maximilian’s own personal works, and extant material culture. An

explanation of each of the central primary sources utilised in the present study will here be

presented so that, when they are referenced throughout this thesis, no further description will

be needed and to justify their relevance to this research. By comparing and contrasting this

variety of sources, a fuller, more complete understanding of Maximilian’s tournaments may be

achieved than has previously been possible through the study of one or two of these categories

of sources alone.

1.2 Narrative Sources

Paula Fichtner has pointed out that ‘scholars only study and comment on Maximilian’s many

images; the person who created and realized them in written and graphic form was the

imaginative Habsburg himself’.1 More light may be shed on this ‘imaginative Habsburg’

1 Paula Fichtner, The Habsburgs: Dynasty, Culture and Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014), p. 31.

17

through a study of the first category of sources utilised in the preparation of this thesis:

narratives. These also come in several sub-categories.

When it comes to locating descriptions of daily life at Maximilian’s court and the

tournaments which took place there, the most useful sources are the various collections of

documents which have been compiled and preserved in several series, many printed in the

nineteenth century. These may be geographically focused ones, such as the Urkunden zur

Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bundes, the Monumenta Wormatiensia, or the excellently thorough

Chroniken der deutschen Städte.2 There are also collections specifically focused on Maximilian,

such as the Urkunden, Briefe und Actenstücke zur Geschichte Maximilians I. und Seiner Zeit and the

Deutsche Reichstagakten unter Maximilian I.3 Another useful record for the Habsburgs in general is

the Monumenta Habsburgica.4 While such collections do not always offer the expansive, narrative

sweep to be found in chronicles, or even diaries or letters, their brief snapshots can provide

unexpected specific details as well as simply giving an idea of the frequency with which

tournaments occurred.

2 Urkunden zur Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bundes (1488-1533), 2 vols, ed. by Karl A. Klüpfel (Stuttgart: Literarischen Verein, 1846-53). These are documents relating to the Swabian League, formed in 1488 at the instigation of Frederick III. Monumenta Wormatiensia: Annalen und Chroniken, ed. by Heinrich Boos (Berlin: Weidmann, 1893). This is part of a series on Quellen zur Geschichte der Stadt Worms, this work includes a few fifteenth-century sources, most particularly the diary of Reinhart Noltz, Burgermeister of Worms. Die Chroniken der deutschen Städte: vom 14. bis ins 16. Jahrhundert, 31 vols (Leipzig: Verlag von G. Hirzel/Göttingen: Vandehoeck & Ruprecht, 1862-1968). These are divided into chronicles of the Frankish, Bavarian, Swabian, Westphalian, Lower Saxon, and Upper, Middle, and Lower Rheinish cities. Not all encompass the correct dates or include references to Maximilian, but some, particularly the volumes focused on Augsburg, are relevant.

3 Urkunden, Briefe und Actenstücke zur Geschichte Maximilians I. und Seiner Zeit, ed. by Joseph Chmel (Stuttgart: Literarischen Verein, 1845). Deutsche Reichstagakten unter Maximilian I., vols 1-6 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972- ). These six volumes (part of a larger series of the Reichstagakten) contain full and partial extracts of documents relating to the various imperial diets held under Maximilian, including some references to tournaments.

4 Monumenta Habsburgica: Sammlung von Actenstücken und Briefen zur Geschichte des Hauses Habsburg in dem Zeitraume von 1473 bis 1576, 3 vols: Das Zeitalter Maximilians I. (Vienna: Kaiserlich-königlichen Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1854-58).

18

Next, chronicles and memoirs are an excellent source of more in-depth narrative detail

on Maximilian. Several include revealing information on the Habsburg monarch or references

to his tournaments, although, in each case, regional bias must be considered. Some of the most

well-known and easily accessible of these tend to be from French or Burgundian authors, such

as those of Jean Molinet (1435-1507), Olivier de la Marche (1425-1502), or Philippe de

Commynes (1447-1511), each of whom crossed paths with the Habsburgs, due to the

intertwining of the Habsburg and Burgundian courts, and whose writings continue to be

published in modern editions.5 On the other hand, the writings of Maximilian’s own court

chroniclers, such as Joseph Grünpeck (1473-1532), provide an interesting alternative to

Burgundian perspectives.6

In the same vein, diaries or collections of letters are of use as well. In many ways, these

are a more valuable resource when it comes to tournaments, as they present a more immediate

and (presumably) factual record of day-to-day occurences at court, as tournaments often were.

Also, in this format, German or Italian sources come more to the fore, such as in the collected

writings of the German academics Conrad Celtis (1459-1508), Georg Spalatin (1484-1545), or

Johannes Cuspinianus (1473-1529), for example.7 The Italian historian Marino Sanuto (1466-

5 Olivier de la Marche, Mémoires d’Olivier de la Marche, ed. by Henri Beaune and J. D’Arbaumont, 4 vols (Paris: Librairie Renouard, 1883-88); Jean Molinet, Chroniques, ed. by Georges Doutrepont and Omer Jodogne, 3 vols (Brussels: Palais des Académies, 1935-37); Philippe de Commynes, Memoirs, ed. by Samuel Kinser, trans. by Isabelle Cazeaux, 2 vols (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1973).

6 Joseph Grünpeck, Die Geschichte Friedrichs III und Maximilians I, trans. by Theodor Ilgen (Leipzig: Verlag der Deutschen Buchhandlung, 1899). For a study solely of the images which appear in this work, see Die Historia Friderici et Maximiliani, ed. by Otto Bensch and Edwin M. Auer (Berlin: Deutscher Verein für Kunstwissenschaft, 1957).

7 Der Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis, ed. by Hans Rupprich (Munich: C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934). This is a collection of letters (in Latin) to and from German humanist Conrad Celtis, who was often at Maximilian’s court and which describe tournaments on several occasions. Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, ed. by Christian Gotthold Neudecker (Jena: Mauke, 1851). These are the collected writings and letters of German humanist Georg Spalatin, who served Friedrich III, Elector of Saxony, a frequent attendee at Maximilian’s court, and thus contain

19

1536) also left extensive records in his diary which have proved useful for this research.8 The

benefit of such chronicles, memoirs or diaries, and letters is that they often offer, in addition to

reference to tournaments, extensive insight into Maximilian’s public image in his own lifetime.9

A brief examination of this trend will help to establish Maximilian’s perceived charactersitics

while also introducing these sources and their authors in a more thorough manner.

1.2.a Maximilian through the Eyes of His Contemporaries

Louise Cuyler has called Maximilian the ‘most legendary and perhaps best-loved of German

monarchs’.10 His reputation into the modern era has certainly grown to almost mythic

proportions. This is largely due to the fact that Maximilian’s reign is one which has left to

modern scholars a vast visual record, many items of which Maximilian himself had a hand in

producing. Yet Cuyler points to the inherent questionability of these sources when she says,

‘Probably no hero of the German people is so celebrated in legend and deeply enshrined in the

affections of his countrymen as the Emperor Maximilian. So intertwined, indeed, are historical

facts and cherished folk tales that a true picture of this Habsburg prince is difficult to

ascertain’.11 While these artefacts – paintings, drawings, woodcuts, engravings, illustrated

manuscripts – are the most attention-grabbing and often the most closely studied remnants of

his lifetime, the emperor also features in numerous narrative sources of the time. And he did

many references to Maximilian’s courtly activities. Johannes Cuspinianus, De Caesaribus atque imperatoribus Romanis (Basil: 1561), Munich, BSB, 2 Germ.g. 14 t, and ‘Tagebuch Johannes Cuspinian’s: 1502-1527’, ed. by Th. G. von Karajan, Fontes Rerum Austriacarum 1/1 (1855), 397-416. For more on Cuspinianus, see Section 1.2.a.

8 Marino Sanuto, I Diarii di Marino Sanuto, 58 vols (Venice: 1879-1903). 9 Also fascinating are the letters he exchanged with his daughter, Margaret of Austria, preserved

in Correspondance de l’empereur Maximilian Ier et de Marguerite d’Autriche, ed. by André Joseph Ghislain le Glay, ed., 2 vols (Paris: Société de l’Histoire de France, 1839).

10 Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music, p. v. 11 Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music, p. 7.

20

not always have control over each of these in the same way. One excellent survey of these

sources may be found in Glenn Waas’ 1941 historiographical work, The Legendary Character of

Kaiser Maximilian.12 Still, Waas claims that ‘only a relatively small group of contemporary

historians and political writers contribute materially to form the picture of Maximilian’.13 Yet

when even just a sample of these sources is examined, a wealth of (often contradictory)

information is revealed which help to paint a new picture of the emperor and offer insight into

his character.

Maximilian’s father, the Holy Roman emperor Frederick III (1415-1493/ruled 1452-

1493), is often viewed by history as largely inept as a monarch, his reign marked by hesitancy,

apathy, and fiscal difficulties (interestingly, all problems which would later plague Maximilian,

although his reputation has generally subsequently escaped such labels). This was a reputation

which began in Frederick’s own lifetime. Maximilian’s childhood also corresponded with his

father’s lowest fortunes. In the second half of the fifteenth century, the empire had

disintegrated into a loose conglomeration of individual political units, spread out across a vast

geographic area. More loyalty was given to local ruling sovereigns than to whoever happened

to claim the title of Holy Roman emperor.14 Growing up in such an environment, it is little

wonder that Maximilian was so interested in building up a positive and lasting reputation for

himself.

12 Waas’ chapter in this work, ‘Maximilian Viewed by His Contemporaries’ (pp. 23-72) is a thorough study of these viewpoints.

13 Waas, The Legendary Character of Kaiser Maximilian, p. 23. 14 Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music, pp. 1-18. Despite his largely negative reputation,

Frederick III’s imperial coronation was in fact the last to be held in Rome – the tradition begun by Charlemagne. By Frederick’s lifetime, few claimants made it to Rome for their anointing, often due to tenuous claims to the throne in the first place. In Frederick’s day, Rome had recently undergone extensive revitalisation, funded by Pope Nicholas V, and Frederick hoped that his anointing there would demonstrate renewed imperial glory while displaying union with the Church. Maximilian, despite his best efforts, would not make it to Rome for his own coronation.

21

In order to do this, Maximilian surrounded himself with men of letters who would

unquestioningly assist him in his cause. Manfred Holleger, one of Maximilian’s modern

biographers, cites figures like court secretaries Joseph Grünpeck and Marx Treitsauerwein

(who assisted in producing some of the most well-known works of Maximilian: Weißkunig and

Theuerdank) as the primary contemporary biographers of Maximilian.15 Although, of course, it

is difficult to establish how much truth may be found in these works, as Maximilian himself

had a heavy hand in supervising and editing the texts. This makes these depictions of

Maximilian of particular interest when studying the emperor, as they represent a hybrid of the

author’s voice and Maximilian’s own input. This is due to the fact that Maximilian took a keen

interest in what went into these biographies, and, while it was not his hand that held the pen,

he took on a supervisory role that went beyond the normal level of involvement. This included

highlighting those traits he wanted emphasised and cutting out those which he did not, which

was done by annotation and direct marking on the manuscripts.16 It is fascinating to examine

the picture of the emperor which emerges from these accounts. And it is unsurprising that

accomplishments of the physical variety are frequently highlighted, as becomes evident below.

Joseph Grünpeck, for example, is perhaps the most frequently cited in any discussion

of Maximilian’s biographers. A humanist and biographer of both Maximilian and his father,

Frederick III, Grünpeck’s most famous work is his Die Historia Friderici et Maximiliani (c. 1515).

Grünpeck served Maximilian from 1497 to 1501, and his Historia is highly favourable to his

lord and patron, who oversaw its production. The work divides Maximilian’s life into three

15 Hollegger, Maximilian I. (1459-1519): Herrscher und Mensch einer Zeitenwende, p. 244. 16 An example of this may be seen in one of Grünpeck’s images showing Maximilian consulting

his astrologers while a fantastic array of symbols, including a sword, crosses, a comet, and even two jousting knights, are spread out across the heavens. Maximilian has emphatically expressed his dislike of the image by means of a large X through the centre: Bensch and Auer, eds, Die Historia Friderici et Maximiliani, fol. 85/p. 127.

22

stages: his childhood, his life actively campaigning as a young man and his military exploits,

and, finally, his years as an elder statesman and patron of the arts.17

In his writings, Grünpeck highlights several of the key attributes of Maximilian’s

personality which many other chroniclers also addressed, but which would divide them into

opposing schools of thought. Grünpeck’s account takes a positive outlook on all aspects of his

employer’s character. In describing Maximilian’s childhood, Grünpeck portrays him as the

perfect student in every respect. He relates how Maximilian excelled in all games, lessons,

orations, and particularly memorisation.18 He also writes of the young ruler’s famously

boundless energy in all pursuits. Maximilian apparently saw to every department of his

household, inspected his stables, and would then sacrifice sleep to pursue hunting and

hawking, another well-known passion of his.19 Grünpeck says that, as a child, Maximilian

would chase barnyard fowl around the castle courtyard, much to his father’s annoyance. As a

man, Maximilian hunted at all times of year and in all weather, always wishing to make the final

kill unassisted.20

Given this portrayal, it is little surprise that the emperor is also described as highly

physically fit and powerfully built as a result of his training in knightly exercises – something

pursued since his childhood. The young Maximilian even apparently used to hide from his

teachers in order to play at jousting, and Grünpeck describes him as growing up adept at all

tournament-related games. In general, Grünpeck seems to focus far more on the physical

training elements of Maximilian’s childhood rather than his academic pursuits. His strength

and athletic prowess are the qualities used to denote him as a noble man and one destined to

17 Benecke, Maximilian I (1459-1519): An Analytical Biography, pp. 7-16. 18 Grünpeck, Die Geschichte Friedrichs III und Maximilians I., p. 33. 19 Grünpeck, Die Geschichte Friedrichs III und Maximilians I., p. 63. 20 Grünpeck, Die Geschichte Friedrichs III und Maximilians I., p. 55.

23

become a great ruler. Apparently Maximilian was such a powerfully built man of such great

physical strength that he could lift a lance of ten ells’ (approximately the length of a man’s arm

from his elbow to the tip of his middle finger) length with one outstretched hand and carry it

that way.21 Descriptions such as these provide readers with a glimpse of Maximilian’s chivalric

and knightly powers and paint a picture of him as an almost superhuman exemplar of such

qualities.

Maximilian’s knightly qualities were matched, according to Grünpeck, by his military

prowess (an issue to be much debated by other chroniclers); Maximilian reportedly was both

popular with and beloved by his soldiers due to his personal bravery and his kindness.22

However, as mentioned above, it is important to note that this work was written with

Maximilian’s close involvement, making it an undeniably partial account. Yet, at the same time,

it deserves to be given a large amount of credence, as Grünpeck’s close association and

frequent interaction with Maximilian give his work an immediacy and realism.

Another chronicler in Maximilian’s employ was Johannes Cuspinianus. Although

Cuspinianus also worked for Maximilian, his account of the emperor’s character is more

practical and less sycophantic than Grünpeck’s. Cuspinianus was a humanist scholar who spent

some time in the employ of the emperor, although his writings about Maximilian were not

published until after the emperor’s death, allowing Cuspinianus slightly more literary freedom.

Thus Cuspinianus, unlike Grünpeck but as many others were subsequently to do, gives an

account of Maximilian not as a child prodigy but as a rather poor student. It was Cuspinianus

who perpetuated the myth about the young emperor that he could not speak until he was

almost fully grown. Cuspinianus even relates an anecdote telling how, at Maximilian’s

21 Grünpeck, Die Geschichte Friedrichs III und Maximilians I., p. 40. 22 Grünpeck, Die Geschichte Friedrichs III und Maximilians I., p. 51.

24

coronation as king of the Romans in 1486, Frederick III announced to all present (rather un-

paternally) that Maximilian could not speak even at twelve years old, and his father feared he

would remain dumb forever. Yet such an unflattering portrait makes a drastic turnaround, as

Cuspinianus then claims that Maximilian went on to become highly proficient in Latin, French,

and Italian.23

Maximilian also manages to make up for his lack of intellectual power by means of a

strong physical presence and charismatic character. Like Grünpeck, Cuspinianus also praises

Maximilian’s affable personality and ability to endear himself to others. In the chivalrous vein,

he also paints Maximilian as an emotionally sensitive man, ever courteous to women. After

Mary of Burgundy died unexpectedly in 1482, Maximilian reportedly never got over his grief

and could not even mention his first wife without sighs and tears.24 And his love for hunting,

again emphasised by Cuspinianus as by Grünpeck, was described as a noble exercise far to be

preferred to that other common princely pastime, pursuing women, and that this should

excuse its cost and consumption of time.25

Cuspinianus also excuses Maximilian’s frequently cited inconsistency of character by

pointing to his lack of money, another fault frequently picked out by chroniclers – thus one

fault is excused by another. This Cuspinianus in turn excuses by saying that Maximilian might

have dipped into the large Habsburg family treasure reserves at any time, thus alleviating his

financial worries, yet he refused, as he wanted to leave it all to his grandsons.26 In this way

Maximilian’s perpetual financial insecurity is exempted by giving him the positive qualities of

frugality and love of family.

23 Cuspinianus, De Caesaribus atque imperatoribus Romanis, p. 602 24 Cuspinianus, De Caesaribus atque imperatoribus Romanis, pp. 604, 612. 25 Cuspinianus, De Caesaribus atque imperatoribus Romanis, p. 614. 26 Cuspinianus, De Caesaribus atque imperatoribus Romanis, p. 613.

25

Unsurprisingly, given his connection by marriage to that land, Maximilian also features

in numerous Burgundian chronicles. In these, his depiction is not always so flattering as that of

the German accounts, although, following his marriage to Mary of Burgundy, many of these

authors came under his employ as well. One of these Burgundian writers was Jean Molinet.

This Burgundian poet and chronicler recorded several events of Maximilian’s reign, and the

emperor features largely in his Chroniques. As Molinet later served as official court chronicler

and historian to Maximilian, his account is also skewed in favour of the joint Habsburg-

Burgundian court. One instance of Maximilian’s appearance in Molinet’s chronicles is when he

writes about the betrothal and marriage of Maximilian to Mary of Burgundy, an event which

figures in several other Burgundian sources, and which is framed as a desirable event with

highly religious overtones, where Mary’s union with Maximilian will produce a child destined

to rule the Burgundian people. Maximilian is set up as the favourable alternative to the son of

King Louis XI of France, another contender for Mary’s hand.27 References to tournaments and

jousts may be found in Molinet’s work as well, such as those held to celebrate the reunion of

Maximilian with his father, Frederick III, in Cologne (where he refers to joustes, bancquetz et

festoyemens), followed by his coronation as king of the Romans.28

Another Burgundian chronicler to write about Maximilian, and one who bridges the

gap between Burgundian and French perspectives, was Philippe de Commynes, a Burgundian

nobleman who later went on to serve King Louis XI of France, the monarch whom Molinet

disapproved of as a choice for Mary’s husband. Like Molinet, in his memoirs de Commynes

does provide an account of the young Maximilian’s betrothal and marriage to Mary of

27 Molinet, Chroniques, vol. 2, pp. 156-62. 28 Molinet, Chroniques, vol. 1, p. 505.

26

Burgundy.29 Unlike Molinet, however, de Commynes takes a more antagonistic approach,

reflecting his French alliances. In his account, much is made of Maximilian’s lack of funds,

another thread which was to run through a variety of narrative sources. As de Commynes

describes it, when Mary’s servants went to meet the young archduke of Austria ‘they found

him with very few funds, and they brought him money, for his father [Frederick III] was a

perfectly stingy man – more so than any prince or other person who lived in our time’, thus

getting in a subtle insult at both Maximilian and his father.30

Indeed, from the beginning, according to de Commynes, the marriage brought no

benefit to Burgundy; it brought no wealth, and, instead, the Burgundian subjects had to supply

Maximilian with money. De Commynes makes very clear his belief in the superiority of the

Burgundian over the Habsburg court when he says that, ‘the furnishings of his [Maximilian’s]

men did not please the subjects of the house of Burgundy, for they had been raised under rich

princes who gave them good situations and maintained a household with honor and pomp,

with respect both to furniture and also to table service and apparel for themselves and their

servants’.31 Here the reader is provided with a glimpse of the splendour of the Burgundian

court as well as how a young Maximilian might be inspired by and wish to emulate such a

lavish court culture. It also makes evident de Commynes’ disdain for Maximilian’s apparently

less than respectable lifestyle.

De Commynes makes no secret of his own opinion of the Holy Roman Empire and its

subjects at that point in time either. ‘The Germans,’ he says, ‘are very different [from the

Burgundians], for they are rude people and they live rudely’.32 The chronicler also backs the

29 de Commynes, Memoirs, vol. 2, pp. 379-85. 30 de Commynes, Memoirs, vol. 2, p. 382. 31 de Commynes, Memoirs, vol. 2, p. 382. 32 de Commynes, Memoirs, vol. 2, p. 382.

27

opinion originally put forth by Cuspinanus that Maximilian ‘had been rather badly educated’,

and that he lacked knowledge of great affairs (although he does at least partly attribute this to

his youth and coming to live in a land strange to him – i.e. Burgundy).33 In general, de

Commynes portrays Maximilian as incompetent, with never enough men or wise advisers in

his service, and, following the death of Mary, unable to fully command or hold the hearts of

the Burgundians.34 Gone is the flattering portrait of Grünpeck or Cuspinianus, or even the

moderately approving one of Molinet.

Another Burgundian chronicler and courtier who served the dukes of that land was

Olivier de la Marche. His own Mémoires feature Maximilian, in whose household he held the

post of grand et premier maître d’hôtel.35 La Marche is of particular interest as a narrative source, as

he was highly involved in both Valois and Habsburg court life, but also the world of the

tournament. Indeed, he spent his early years as a page in the household of Anthoine de Croy, a

knight in the household of the Burgundian duke Philip the Good and a member of the Order

of the Golden Fleece. There la Marche would have learned weaponry, horsemanship, and

hawking as part of his education, giving him an intimate familiarity with the chivalric lifestyle

of the nobleman, something which would be reflected in many of his later writings.36

La Marche also wrote a treatise entitled État de la maison du duc Charles de Bourgogne,

which was essentially a guide for the running of a princely household based on that of Charles

33 de Commynes, Memoirs, vol. 2, p. 383. 34 de Commynes, Memoirs, vol. 2, p. 411. 35 Alistair Miller, ‘Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502’ (unpublished

doctoral thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1996), p. 43. La Marche would go on to hold this same title in the household of Maximilian’s oldest son, Philip.

36 Miller, ‘Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502’, pp. 14-16. La Marche was also exposed to numerous tournaments as a young man, and he would, in turn, later write about many himself. For example, in 1470 he wrote an account of a pas d’armes of famous Burgundian tournament fighter Claude de Vauldrey, who would later fight Maximilian in 1495: the Traictie d'un Toumoy tenu a Gand par Claude de Vauldrey seigneur de l'Aigle l'an 1469 [o.s.].

28

the Bold of Burgundy, the father of Mary. La Marche wrote a second, shorter treatise in 1500

entitled Advis des grans officers que doit avoir ung Roy et de leur pouvoir et entreprise, which was

addressed specifically to Maximilian and which provided an analysis of all the principal officers

which a king should employ. These two treatises reflect Maximilian’s desire to emulate the

Burgundian court lifestyle and illustrate ways in which he could have done so. If some

chroniclers, like de Commynes, held a low opinion of the Holy Roman emperor and the

Germanic court, then these writings would have offered Maximilian a way to elevate his

household and, by extension, his reputation.37

In addition, Maximilian features in other, more unexpected contemporary sources. He

is even mentioned in Niccolò Machiavelli’s (1469-1527) famous work, The Prince. Unfortunately

for the emperor, Machiavelli is critical of Maximilian and features him as an example of how a

ruler should not behave. The Italian describes him as too secretive and unwilling to take

advice, as well as too easily diverted:

Because the Emperor is a secretive man, he communicates his plans to no one, nor does he take their advice. However, when he is carrying out his plans and they begin to be recognized and uncovered, they begin to be criticized by those around him; and he, just as if it were a simple matter, lets himself be diverted. From this results the fact that those things he does one day, he undoes the next; and that no one ever understands what he wants or what plans he is making, and that no one can rely on his decisions.38

Again, the theme of Maximilian’s indecisiveness and susceptibility to diversion is brought to

the fore, a complaint fairly common throughout the sources. Such a description harks back to

complaints about Frederick III. Yet still, incredibly, Maximilian found a way to escape this

reputation, largely through the aid of his tournament culture, as will be seen.

37 Miller, ‘Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502’, pp. 59-65. 38 Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince, trans. and ed. by Peter Bondanella (Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 2005), p. 81.

29

Maximilian also appears in English sources and a comparison of two English

diplomats’ opinions of him encapsulates the contradictory emotions which the emperor could

evoke. The first of these is Richard Pace (1482-1536). Pace was an English diplomat who was

engaged in negotiations with Maximilian on behalf of Henry VIII regarding the emperor’s wars

with the French in northern Italy. Like Machiavelli and some of the Burgundian chroniclers,

Pace offers readers a critical view of Maximilian, accusing him of extravagance. According to

one of his biographers Jervis Wegg, Pace regarded Maximilian as a ‘needy adventurer’ and,

from his early years in Italy, developed a lifelong dislike of the emperor.39 Pace, again, makes

no secret of his low opinion of Maximilian’s financial dealings, saying, ‘Whenever the King’s

[Henry VIII] money passed where the Emperor was he would always get some portion of it by

force or false promises of restitution’.40 Pace also shares the opinion of others that Maximilian

was indecisive, saying that he ‘doth as often times change his mind as the weathercock doth

change his turn’.41

In contrast to such disparaging remarks is the view of English diplomat Robert

Wingfield (1464-1539). Although, despite his more positive view, Wingfield does still lend

credence to Maximilian’s reputation as a man constantly short of money when he reported that

‘Maximilian has lately mortgaged a great portion of his lands’.42 Still, Wingfield thought very

39 Jervis Wegg, Richard Pace: A Tudor Diplomatatist (London: Methuen & Co. Ltd, 1932), p. 7. For a more recent study of Pace, see the works of Cathy Curtis.

40 Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, ed. by J.S. Brewer, vols 1-2 (London: 1864- 1920), vol. 2, p. 517.

41 Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, vol. 2, p. 602. 42 Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, vol. 2, p. 989. For more on the relationship

between Wingfield and Maximilian, see Michael Chisholm, ‘Robert Wingfield: English Ambassador to the Holy Roman Empire (1510-1517)’, in Maximilian I. (1459-1519): Wahrnehmung – Übersetzungen – Gender, ed. by Heinz Noflascher, Michael Chisholm, and Bertrand Schnerb, Innsbrucker Historische Studien, 27 (Innsbruck: Studienverlag, 2011), pp. 71-84.

30

well of Maximilian, to the disdain of Richard Pace, who wrote that Wingfield took Maximilian

‘for a god, and thinks that all his deeds and thoughts proceed ex Spiritu Sancto’.43

Maximilian also found his way into the writings of famed humanist and theologian

Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam (c. 1466-1536). Unlike his prominent contemporary

Machiavelli, however, Erasmus again presents a contradictory picture by praising the emperor

as a leader to be admired. Writing in regards to Maximilian’s rulership of the city of Strasbourg,

for example, Erasmus said that in Maximilian it had ‘the mildest of princes, whose power it

never feels except when it receives some benefit from his wisdom and generosity. And here we

have a noble quality, worthy only of a truly great emperor, [...] so the noblest empire is the one

which protects instead of oppressing the liberty of its citizens, which fosters instead of driving

aways its people’s wealth, and makes all things flourish’.44 In Erasmus’ eyes, Maximilian was

the ideal Renaissance ruler: wise and generous and a man who loves his subjects and takes an

interest in their lives.

Erasmus saw rulers such as Maximilian, Francis I of France, and Henry VIII of

England as ‘the greatest princes of the world’; they were men who were turning away from war

and toward the promotion of the humanities and liberal arts. Because of this, said Erasmus in a

1517 letter to the theologian Wolfgang Faber Capito of Haguenau, ‘I perceive we may shortly

behold the rise of a new golden age’, because of the ‘heaven-sent change we see in the minds

of princes, who bend all their powers to the pursuit of peace and concord’. Contrary to earlier

writings about Maximilian as a young man, where his flaws might come to the fore, Erasmus is

writing about the older and presumably wiser Maximilian. This is the Maximilian ‘who in his

43 Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, vol. 2, p. 517. 44 Collected Works of Erasmus, trans. by R.A.B. Mynors and D.F.S. Thomson, vols 1-86 (1974-

1993), (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977), vol. 3, p. 27.

31

old age, wearied by so many wars, has decided to relax in the arts of peace, which will prove

both more appropriate to his time of life and more beneficial to the Christian world’.45

As is evident, the overall views are in these narrative sources are conflicting. For every

chronicle that says Maximilian was well-educated and intelligent, there is one that claims his

learning was stunted and that he was slow to grasp even his native language. They also often

criticise his secretiveness and inability to keep his finances organised. His perpetual lack of

funds is a common theme throughout many narrative sources. Yet many declare that he was an

excellent soldier and leader, while just as many point to his indecisiveness and slowness to act

in critical situations. However, even while debating his skill as a campaigner and leader of

armies, what many do seem to agree upon, however, is his excellence as a knight. His strength

and physical skill come across in his love of tournaments and hunting, even though this might

occasionally come at the expense of his attention to his duties as a monarch. Still, the image of

Maximilian as a powerful tournament fighter and pursuer of a chivalric lifestyle is often just as

vivid in narrative form as it is in the pictorial representations of his reign. Interestingly, it is

descriptions like these which eventually led to Maximilian receiving the rather romantic title

Der letzte Ritter, or ‘the last knight’ – the epithet which has stuck most persistently to him. Yet

this was only bestowed in a nineteenth-century account of his life by Count Anton Alexander

von Auersperg.46 Out of all these contemporary writers’ varied viewpoints, it was a Victorian

count who, with a simple phrase, crafted the most enduring image of Maximilian.

45 Collected Works of Erasmus, vol. 4, p. 261-63. 46 Waas, The Legendary Character of Kaiser Maximilian, p. 181.

32

1.3 Visual Sources

The second category of sources utilised at great length in the present study are visual sources,

of which a wealth survive relating to Maximilian’s reign or to late medieval German

tournaments. As will be seen, Maximilian himself had a hand in producing many of them.47 At

least one thousand pictures of Maximilian survive, many accompanied by entirely uncritical

texts.48 Many of these also relate to tournaments. The foremost category of illustrated primary

source which was of immense value for this thesis is the German tournament book, or

Turnierbuch. The tournament books produced around the time of Maximilian’s reign reveal

much about the place of the tournament in the wider Holy Roman Empire. Produced for

many different audiences and patrons, they were, for some, a mark of social standing, while

others were a historical record, while still others were elaborate exemplars of the idealised

tournament.

There are some particularly interesting examples of the Turnierbuch which may be

examined in this context. One which could be considered the most comprehensive of all

German Turnierbücher is that by Georg Rüxner (first edition: 1530).49 While it relies far more on

text than imagery, it still warrents the title ‘tournament book’ based upon its content. Rüxner’s

work is a largely fictionalised and glorified chronicle of the most famous tournaments (some

47 An excellent catalogue of these may be found in Franz Unterkircher, Maximilian I.: Ein kaiserlicher Auftraggeber illustrierter Handschriften (Hamburg: Maximlian-Gesellschaft, 1983). This is a comprehensive survey of the illustrated literary works created for or commissioned by Maximilian in his lifetime, from his childhood lehrbücher to his hunting and fishing books to his genealogical works to the eponymous Freydal, etc. Unterkircher lists where they can be found in their originals and also subsequently printed editions.

48 Fichtner, The Habsburgs: Dynasty, Culture and Politics, p. 31. 49 Rüxner, Georg, TurnierBuch Von Anfang, ursprung, und herkommen, der Thurnier im heyligen Römischen

Reich Teutscher Nation… (Frankfurt am Main: Feyerabend & Hüter, 1566), Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (hereafter referred to as BSB), 4 Mil.g 223 p#Beibd.2. For more on Rüxner, see Klaus Graf, ‘Herold mit vielen Namen: Neues zu Georg Rüxner alias Rugen alias Jerusalem alias Brandenburg alias…’, in Ritterwelten im Spätmittelalter: Höfisch-ritterliche Kultur der Reichen Herzöge von Bayern-Landshut, pp. 115-26.

33

real, some not) held since its advent in German-speaking courts, and it places the tournament

in a prominent position in the German cultural mind-set. The printed work is enhanced by a

series of handsome woodcuts depicting these tournaments, and, taken together, the text and

the images create a glimpse into how the tournament was viewed at the time, not just as a

military exercise, but as a historical legacy.

The most common type of Turnierbücher, however, were those produced for an

individual in order to chronicle their singular accomplishments at tournaments which, unlike

many of those recorded in the work of Rüxner, actually took place. These Turnierbücher are the

ones which provide the closest thing to a snapshot of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century German

tournaments. Although they vary greatly in their content, artistic quality, and portrayal of the

tournament, they offer insight into the tournament which no narrative source alone can. Their

individual quality is largely dependent on the person for which the book was produced. In

general, the Turnierbücher tend to be large manuscripts, which would often have been on display

in the subject’s home for his guests to admire. One knight, Gasper Lamberger (see below), and

his descendents collected signatures of famous guests in his Turnierbuch, for example. They

follow a similar formula as well: each consists of a series of images depicting a frozen moment

of combat, almost always from the joust. Accompanying text is normally minimal, but

individual competitors are frequently, but not always, labelled. Many Turnierbücher were

produced during or shortly after Maximilian’s reign, and six especially have been of particular

use for this thesis.

The first of these is the Turnierbuch produced for Elector Johann of Saxony (1468-

1532).50 Johann was part of a long-standing noble German family, being the son of Elector

50 The prince-electors (Kurfürsten) were members of the electoral college of the Holy Roman Empire and were responsible for electing the king of the Romans as well as the Holy Roman emperor.

34

Ernst of Saxony (who was present in 1486 at Maximilian’s coronation as king of the Romans)

and Elisabeth, daughter of Duke Albrecht III of Bavaria, as well as the brother to Friedrich III

of Saxony, who also took part in Maximilian’s tournaments. Known as der Beständige (‘the

constant’), Johann became elector following the death of his childless brother, Friedrich.51 He

served Maximilian in several campaigns in the 1490s. A keen tournament participant, Johann’s

accomplishment as a competitor in the joust are commemorated in a Turnierbuch, produced in

the late sixteenth century (c. 1585). Johann’s Turnierbuch is the first chronologically in a series

produced by the electors of Saxony, which collectively cover the period 1487-1566. In the

work, Johann is depicted taking part in an impressive 125 jousts from 1487 until 1527. In each

image, the viewer is presented with a snapshot of an individual joust between Johann and his

opponent, each of whom are labelled and who also include Maximilian. The date and location

of each encounter is also normally provided.52

Another Turnierbuch produced for an associate of Maximilian was that of Gasper

Lamberger (c. 1463-c. 1515).53 Lamberger was from modern Slovenia, but he spent most of his

life outside of his homeland, travelling with Maximilian’s court and serving as a military

commander in his armies. Lamberger’s Turnierbuch was created c. 1504-1507 and includes

eighty-seven images of jousts which took place between 1480 and 1504. It is similar in style to

that of Johann of Saxony, although the quality and detail of the drawings are perhaps not quite

as fine. Each page shows Lamberger competing in a joust against an opponent, who is also

During Maximilian’s lifetime there were four secular electorates: the kingdom of Bohemia, the county palatine of the Rhine, the duchy of Saxony, and the margraviate of Brandenburg.

51 He often appears across sources as Hans von Saxon. 52 Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, ed. by Erich Haenel (Frankfurt: Verlag von Heinrich

Keller, 1910). 53 Lamberger’s name also appears as Caspar von Lamberg or Gas ̌per Lamberger.

35

named. These tend to be other famous knights of the time and, also like Johann’s Turnierbuch,

include Maximilian himself as a competitor.54

One man who was not a titled noble, but who moved in courtly society and produced

his own Turnierbuch, was Ludwig VI von Eyb (1450-1521). Von Eyb ‘the Younger’, as he was

known, to differentiate him from his father, Ludwig von Eyb ‘the Elder’, was a court official

and military leader. He served as Hofmeister to several high-ranking nobles of the Holy Roman

Empire and, at the end of his life, he was able to retire to his own castle of Hartenstein. He

was knighted in 1476, was well educated, and was a member of the tournament society the

Order of the Unicorn. His Turnierbuch, produced c. 1525, contains images of ten separate

tournaments. It is drastically different in style, however, from Johann of Saxony or Gasper

Lamberger’s in its content and quality. Its focus is solely on mounted group combat, rather

than the individual joust preferred by the above knights. There is also less detail and realism to

be found in the images. It reflects more the competitions held by tournament societies of this

period, but its depictions of tournament settings and the style of combat illustrated make it a

useful resource.55

There is also the Turnierbuch of Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria (1493-1550), produced c.

1544 and depicting tournaments in which the duke part from 1510 to 1518. Wilhelm was the

son of Maximilian’s sister Kunigunde and was thus Maximilian’s nephew. Although he was too

young to have competed against Maximilian in tournaments, his Turnierbuch follows closely in

54 The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger / Das Turnierbuch des Caspar von Lamberg, ed. by Dušan Kos, ed., Codex A 2290, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Wien, Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer, (Ljubljana: Viharnik, d.o.o., 1997).

55 Munich, BSB, Cgm 961, Das Turnierbuch des Ludwig von Eyb. In addition to producing his Turnierbuch, von Eyb was a writer whose biography of German military leader Wilwolt von Schaumburg has also been of use to this thesis: Ludwig von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, ed. by Adelbert von Keller (Stuttgart: Literarischen Vereins, 1859).

36

the mould of those produced by Maximilian and his contemporaries; each image depicts only

Wilhelm and his opponent in a joust, with minimal necessary textual information and an

emphasis on the grandeur of the event through highly detailed armour and textiles. Because of

this, its high quality and masterful illustrations still make it a valuable contributor to this

research.56

These Turnierbücher were not just for the elite, however. Another which has been of use

to this thesis for its images of the late medieval German tournament is that of wealthy

Augsburg merchant, Marx Walther (1456-1511). Walther was the fifteenth of twenty-two

children born to Augsburg master builder Ulrich Walther. Thanks to his own commercial

prosperity and his marriage to Afra Meuting, the daughter of another affluent Augsburg family,

Walther was able to devote a substantial amount of his time to competing in the tournaments

which took place during civic celebrations held in Augsburg, and his reputation as a skilled

competitor enticed several nobles to come compete against him, many of whom feature in

Walther’s Turnierbuch alongside the non-titled citizens of the city. Walther’s manuscript is

believed to have been created c. 1506-1511; it spans the years 1477-89 and records nineteen

separate tournaments. The work offers a vivid depiction of the customs of the smaller

tournaments which took place during this time. Its quality, depiction of combat forms, and

illustrations of both armour and textiles make it a useful resource, as does its efforts to imitate

other noble Turnierbücher of the period and its frequent crossover in competitors. Like

56 Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, ed. by F. Schlichtegroll. (Munich: 1817). Although Wilhelm was much younger than Maximilian, there is an overlap between the two generations, as Wilhelm appears in a Turnierbuch featuring Maximilian, discussed below, at a tournament in Heidelberg in 1511. The two were present at the same tournament, although they did not compete against each other (although, as will be seen later, it is likely that Maximilian was still competing in tournaments at this point in his life; perhaps he did not want to take on such a young opponent): Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, Turnierbuch. Ritterspiele gehalten von Kaiser Friedrich III. und Kaiser Maximilian I. in den Jahren 1489 – 1511, plate 59.

37

Lamberger’s dual-purpose collecting of signatures in his Turnierbuch, Walther also included in

his a Familienchronik.57

Men like Johann of Saxony and Gasper Lamberger were part of Maximilian’s

immediate tournament network, and their Turnierbücher demonstrate an interconnectedness in

their participants and in the tournament styles depicted. By producing their own Turnierbücher,

they were showing themselves to be members of an elite club and were also portraying

themselves as equal, in many ways, to Maximilian. Men like Wilhelm IV were later interested in

carrying on and upholding this tradition in their own Turnierbücher. For men like Walther, this

was a chance to emulate the nobility. His own Turnierbuch may be seen as aspirational, rather

than, like the others, validation of an established social standing.

The Turnierbuch which has probably proved most useful to this thesis is one which is

believed to have been produced in the mid-sixteenth century in Augsburg (a centre of printing

at the time).58 The work contains a record of five tournaments, spanning the years 1489-1511.

The first of these tournaments took place in Linz at the end of 1489, lasting into the beginning

of 1490. The second tournament in the manuscript was held in Innsbruck in 1497, as was the

third in 1498. The fourth tournament in the book falls out of chronological sequence, having

been held in Nuremberg in 1491. The final tournament took place much later, in 1511, in

Heidelberg. The manuscript displays a wide range of styles of joust, including both unique

forms of individual and group combat. Also of note is the fact that Maximilian is a competitor

in the first four of these tournaments, and the other combatants are some of the most frequent

tournament participants in his court (see Table 1).

57 Munich, BSB, Cgm 1930, Marx Walther, Turnierbuch und Familienchronik. 58 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398.

38

Tournament Combatants

Linz, 1489-90

Herzog Erich von Braunschweig Schennkh Cristoff von Lunburg

Holzsattel Hanns Wallenfels

Herr Gaspar von Lamberg Herr Anthoni von Yffan

Herr Anndres von Liechtenstain Graf Haug von Muntfort

Wilhalm von Pfirt Herr Gaspar von Lamberg

Romischer Kunig Maximilian Herr Anthoni von Yffan

Herr Anndreas von Lichtenstain Herzog Erich von Braunschweig

Graf Jorg von Pastel Albrecht von Veilstain

Romischer Kunig Maximilian Herr Anthoni von Yffan

Herr Hanns von Stain Herr Enngelhart Rorer

Graf Jorg von Passtel Albrecht von Veilstain

Herr Anthoni von Yffan Herr Christoff Flaischberger

Nuremberg, 1491

Herr Schenkh Cristoff von Lunenburg Romischer Kunig Maximilian

Desr Margraven diener Margraf Fridrich von Brandenburg

Herr Anthoni von Yffan Herr Christof von Welsperg

Two tourneys with unnamed participants

Innsbruck, 1497 Romischer Kunig Maximilian

Herzog Friderich von Saxen

Churfurst

Herr Sigmund von Welsperg Romischer Kunig Maximilian

Innsbruck, 1498 Romischer Kunig Maximilian Herzog Hanns von Saxen

Romischer Kunig Maximilian Graf Hanns von Montfort

Heidelberg, 1511

Herr Bernhart Beller Herr Adolff von Biber

Graf von Ortenburg Graf von Schellenberg

Herzog Wilhalm von Bairn Herr Egloss Stainer

Herr Steffan von Schmian Graf von Muntfort

Graf von Eilberg Graf Wilhalm von Nassaw

Herr Jorg von Hirnhaim Margraf Philip von Baden

Herr von Woszbach Graf von Cronberg

39

Herr Wolff von Mila Herr Krafft

Der Lung Der von Habarn Fransziscus von

Sikhingen

Graf von

Bitsch

Herr von Flekhenstain Herr Hainsz Druchsesz

Herr von Schwarszenberg Gaspar Erelshait

Table 1: Combatants in Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 39859

1.3 Maximilian’s Personal Works

The third category of sources may be grouped together as those commissioned and produced

by Maximilian personally during his lifetime, all of which also have a strong visual component.

These include perhaps the most famous Turnierbuch associated with Maximilian: Freydal.60 The

emperor is the undisputed star of this work, as it was one of several books commissioned by

him to commemorate his reign. It is slightly different in its concept, however, from the above-

mentioned Turnierbücher, not in the least because it was intended to be produced as a printed

book rather than a single manuscript, although it never made it to print in Maximilian’s

lifetime.

Freydal uses a fictional setup in which Maximilian (i.e. the valiant young knight Freydal)

competes in a series of tournaments in several courts, watched and judged by several noble

maidens, in order to eventually reach the court of his intended bride (i.e. Mary of Burgundy).

This minimal plot, however, only serves as a framework, allowing Maximilian to be depicted

fighting against actual historic figures and members of his court (many of whom also appear in

59 Names in this table have been presented in their original ENHG spellings as they appear in the manuscript.

60 The original manuscript of Freydal (c. 1512-15) is held in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (Inv.-Nr. 5073). For the purposes of this thesis, I have relied on Freydal: des Kaisers Maximilian I turniere und mummereien, ed. by Quirin von Leitner (Vienna: Adolf Hozhausen, 1880-1882).

40

BSB, Cod.icon 398). Freydal is a unique combination of fiction and reality.61 In its blurring of

real life and chivalric fantasy, Freydal is similar in many ways to the common Burgundian

tournament format. However, as Heinrich Fichtenau has pointed out, Freydal is also very

different from any pre-existing Burgundian models. Although Maximilian appears in these

illustrations lavishly decked out in Burgundian-style opulence, and could be seen as presenting

himself as a true Burgundian duke, the format is far more clinical than traditional Burgundian

tournament accounts. More so than any literature detailing the exploits of a Burgundian bon

chevalier (such as the deeds of Jacques de Lalaing), which often featured detailed descriptions of

the extraneous performances and courtly speeches, Freydal was a substantial reduction of this

presentation, showing that Maximilian’s true interest was solely in the tournament itself.62

Fryedal consists of 255 plates lavishly illustrating this series of tournament combats.

Included are thirty-three iterations of the Gestech (including twenty-eight Welschgestech), sixty-

three iterations of the Rennen, two combinations of the Rennen and Gestech, in which one

competitor is equipped for each, and one mounted combat with swords.63 It also includes

sixty-four instances of foot combat and sixty-four masked dances, or mummerei. These always

proceed in a set sequence of two jousts, one foot combat, and one mummerei. Differing hands

of varying skill levels are obvious throughout the work. Some are closer to the rounded,

cartoonish figures like those found in the von Eyb Turnierbuch, while some are crisper and

more detailed, similar to the quality of the Saxony Turnierbuch.

61 Stefan Krause, ‘»die ritterspiel als ritter Freydalb hat gethon aus ritterlichem gmute« - Das Turnierbuch Freydal Kaiser Maximilians I.’, in Kaiser Maximilian I.: Der letzte Ritter und das höfische Turnier, pp. 167-80.

62 Fichtenau, Der Junge Maximilian (1459-1482), p. 46. 63 Explanation of each of these styles of joust will follow in Chapter 3.

41

Another work commissioned by Maximilian offers a very different type of tournament

record: Maximilian’s Triumphzug, or his triumphal procession. The Triumphzug is a sequence of

137 woodcuts produced at Maximilian’s behest, the plan for which was dictated by the

emperor to his secretary, Marx Treitsaurwein, in 1512. The architect and designer Jörg

Kölderer prepared the original sketches, which were then drawn in full by a collection of noted

artists of the time, most particularly Hans Burgkmair (the Elder), although Albrecht Altdorfer,

Hans Springinklee, Leonhard Beck, Hans Schäufelein, and Wolf Huber have been credited

with contributions as well, and Albrecht Dürer is responsible for at least two of the sheets.

Although the first edition of the Triumphzug was not printed until 1526, seven years after

Maximilian’s death (and, even then, it was still incomplete), the original text does echo the

voice of the emperor himself. The Triumphzug depicts a triumphal procession of all the glories

of Maximilian’s court. It features musicians, huntsmen, fools, soldiers, nobles, and knights at

tournament in various forms and was meant to be viewed and admired by the public.64 The

concept behind the artwork – that of the triumphal procession of a victorious ruler making a

grand entrance into a city – was already part of a strong medieval tradition, and lavish, idealised

illustrations of these events were growing in popularity in the fifteenth century, making

Maximilian’s commission of the work not at all unusual for his time.

Maximilian’s Triumphzug is uniquely personal to his reign, however. 65 In it Maximilian

gives centre stage to his love of hunting, featuring five differently equipped groups of hunters,

64 Eva Michel, ‘"zu ainer gedochtnüß hie auf Erden". Albrecht Altdorfers Triumphzug für Kaiser Maximilian’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I., pp. 381-94.

65 For the purposes of this thesis, I have relied upon The Triumph of Maximilian: 137 Woodcuts by Hans Burgkmair and Others, ed. and trans. by Stanley Applebaum. The specific tournament-related prints may also be found in Turnierzug Hans Burgkmair des Älteren, ed. by Dr Hans Stöcklein (Munich: Verlag für Historische Waffenskunde, 1924). The original prints may be found in the Albertina and the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna. Hans Burgkmair the Younger subsequently re-issued the

42

including falconry and boar or bear hunting. He pays homage to various events he considered

central to his legacy, such as his marriage to his first wife Mary of Burgundy (along with

accompanying representatives of his acquired Burgundian territories) as well as that of his son

Philip the Fair to Juana of Spain (no section, interestingly, is dedicated to Maximilian’s second

marriage to Bianca Maria Sforza of Milan). Illustrations are included of the Holy Roman

Empire’s most famous princes, counts, barons, and knights, and the various wars and battles in

which Maximilian participated are commemorated. What is critical to note about the

Triumphzug, however, is that it is not a tournament book. The tournament images do not

chronicle specific tournaments, or any real-life event, but portray idealised versions of knights

participating in various forms of combat. Like Rüxner’s Turnierbuch, the value of this work

comes not from its depiction of actual historical events, but rather from their representation of

a specific, carefully-constructed image of the tournament.

For the purposes of this study, the Triumphzug is one of the most useful works

produced under Maximilian when it comes to understanding the different forms of joust which

he favoured in his court. In this work, the styles of joust to be found in Maximilian’s court are

specifically labelled, each with an individual name and different forms of equipment and

decoration. The Triumphzug clearly divides the participants of the Gestech and the Rennen into

two separate categories. The Gestech is further subdivided into four varieties, while the Rennen is

more impressively presented in twelve different forms. The Triumphzug played a critical role in

memorialising German tournament culture by acting as a survey of each form of joust

tournament prints of the Triumphzug with only slight alterations – mainly changes to the dress of the figures. These images have also played a role in this thesis from these sources: Hans Burgkmair des Jüngeren: Turnierbuch von 1529, ed. by Dr Heinrich Pallmann (Leipzig: Karl W. Hiersemann, 1910); Hans Burgkmaiers Turnier-Buch, ed. by Heinrich Jakob von Hefner, (Frankfurt am Main: Sigmund Schmerber, 1853); and Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 403, Turnierbuch - Kopie nach dem Original von Hans Burgkmair.

43

favoured by Maximilian in which each image clearly demonstrates what defines the various

forms as a Rennen or a Gestech and the equipment needed. Hans Stöcklein, in his introduction to

a re-printing of the tournament prints alone, says that,

Kaiser Maximilian I. war betanntlich ein begeisterter Freund des, seinem ritterlichen Gefuehl besonders zusagenden, Turniers. Er hat, wie der Freydal beweist, selbst jede Gelegenheit benuetzt, sich auf dem Turnierplatze im Stechen und Rennen zu ueben, hat so manchen Gegner zu Boden gestrecht, ist auch selbst zuweilen abgerannt worden und hat sich in Erfindung neuer Arten des Turniers sowie der Verbesserung der Ruestung eifrig betaetigt. So ist es ganz natuerlich, dass die Darstellung des Turniers in seinem Triumphzuge eine bedeutende Rolle spielen musste.66

It must also, however, be clearly stated that none of the images in this work reflect

historical tournaments which took place in actuality; they are entirely figurative images in a

fictional parade. In other words, the images do not attempt to recreate what an actual moment

of combat from the depicted form might look like, as a Turnierbuch would. Rather, they are

purely a symbol, emblematic of what the ideal competitors in each might look like. The men

parade, in groups of five, in a straight line, looking ahead and holding their lances aloft in neat

rows, taking their place in the train of sometimes realistic, sometimes fanciful, people, places,

and things of Maximilian’s realm. Nor are the figures themselves, apart from two exceptions,

to be discussed later, intended to be real people of Maximilian’s court.67 They are generic,

66 ‘Emperor Maximilian I was, of course, an enthusiastic friend of the tournament, which was particularly suited to his chivalrous feeling. He himself, as Freydal proves, took every opportunity to practice the Gestech and Rennen in the lists; he knocked so many opponents to the ground, and he was also sometimes defeated, and he eagerly engaged in the invention of new kinds of the tournament as well as improvement of the armaments. So it is quite natural that the presentation of the tournament had to play an important role in his Triumphzug;’ Stöcklein, ed. Turnierzug Hans Burgkmair des Älteren, p. 9.

67 Other sections of the Triumph do feature a selection of the actual princes, counts, and knights of Maximilian’s court, many of whom did indeed compete in his tournaments, but who, in this work, are not associated with the tournament sections.

44

occasionally faceless male figures, forming part of the idealised image of one style of joust in

its most uniform, refined form.

There is also the question of how believable the Triumphzug is as a guide to varieties of

the joust. Some forms, as shall be seen in Chapter 3, can be found to have been conducted on

a regular basis in Maximilian’s court, while some represent more fanciful, imaginative

incarnations of the joust. Taken as a whole, these illustrations are elevated above what a real-

life occurrence of one of these competitions may have looked like, with all the accompanying

inconsistencies and varying factors which might come into play in a real-world situation. They

are instead a perfected, streamlined portrayal of how Maximilian, approaching old age, wished

his tournaments to be remembered. Apart from the artistic restrictions and limitations of such

a work, this lack of acted-out combat in the images suggests a basic understanding on the part

of its intended audience of what the names of each specified form meant and the rules which it

implied. It expects the viewer to be able to recognise each style and to imagine for themselves

the competition which would result from each; it is a celebratory and not a didactic work.

Two other primary sources produced by Maximilian himself have been of use as both

illustrated and narrative resources, and these are the printed works Weißkunig and Theuerdank.

These two books are often grouped with Freydal in discussions of Maximilian, as the three

represent Maximilian’s efforts to produce printed works in book form to commemorate his

reign in various ways. When combined, these three in particular represent a complete cycle of

the emperor’s life - although admittedly highly fictionalised - and with Maximilian featuring in

each as the allegorical, titular hero. Weißkunig tells the story of Maximilian’s (the young ‘White

King’) youth and education as he takes over power from his father (the old ‘White King’) and

45

goes on to become successful ruler.68 Featuring 251 woodcuts, many of which were, once

again, the work of Hans Burgkmair, and other thinly disguised historical figures, such as the

kings of France and Hungary (the Blue King and the Green King), Weißkunig, like Freydal,

remained incomplete and was not printed during Maximilian’s lifetime.69

Theuerdank, on the other hand, tells the story of just one event in Maximilian’s life: his

courtship of Mary of Burgundy. It is an entirely fictional account of how

Maximilian/Theuerdank must undertake a dangerous quest to reach his intended bride,

performing feats of bravery along the way. Theuerdank is the only one of this trilogy to have

been published during Maximilian’s lifetime, in 1517.70 Tournaments play a role in both of

these works in vital ways: in Weißkunig, we see some of the practicalities of training a noble

youth for tournaments, while in Theuerdank, we see the most glorified version of the

tournament in a chivalric literary setting.71 Both ideals will play a role in this thesis.

68 Editions used for this thesis include Der Weißkunig: Eine Erzehlung von den Thaten Kaiser Maximilian des Ersten (Vienna: Kurzböck, 1775); Der Weisskunig: Nach den Dictaten und Eigenhandigen Aufzeichnungen Kaiser Maximilian I, ed. by Alwin Schultz, reprinted from Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhochsten Kaiserhauses 6 (1891); Weiss Kunig: tableau des principaux evenemens de la vie et du regne de l’empereur Maximilian I (Vienna: Chez I. Alberti, 1799).

69 Elke Anna Werner ‘Kaiser Maximilians Weißkunig. Einige Beobachtungen zur Werkgenese der Illustrationen’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I., pp. 349-80.

70 Editions used for this thesis include: Die Geferlicheiten und geschichten des löblichen streytbaren unnd hochberiempten Helds und Ritters Teürdancks (Augsburg: Stainer, 1537), Munich, BSB, Rar. 2195; and Theuerdank: The Adventures and a Portion of the Story of the Praiseworthy, Valiant, and High-Renowned Hero and Knight, Lord Tewrdannckh, ed. by W. Harry Rylands (London: Holbein Society, 1884).

71 Rabea Kohnen, ‘"Das mer gebeert zuo eim Ritter auserkorn". Überlegungen zum Theuerdank’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I, pp. 255-80; Hans-Joachim Ziegeler, ‘Beobachtungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte von Kaiser Maximilians Theuerdank’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I, pp. 211-54.

46

1.5 Material Culture

Finally, in order to complete the most thorough study of Maximilian’s tournaments possible,

an examination of the extant material sources is also necessary. These include tournament

armour for various varieties of joust, including torso, leg, arms, and head protection, along

with lances, and also equestrian equipment. While visual sources such as the Turnierbücher prove

their worth through their depictions of more ephemeral items, such as textiles, hardly any of

which have survived to the present day, the arms and armour which can be studied in person

represent the three-dimensional, physical artefacts of Maximilian’s time; many of which were

touched by his own hand. Details can be discovered here which might not be preserved on

paper. Further, these items offer valuable comparative material. Relating surviving tournament

arms and armour to those artistic depictions of the same allow us to know how reliable and

accurate those images are. For the purposes of this thesis, two collections in particular have

been of great use: that of the Royal Armouries, Leeds, and the Kunsthistorisches Museum,

Vienna.72

1.6 Conclusions

As this range of primary sources makes evident, the examination of tournaments during

Maximilian’s lifetime undertaken in the present study is a highly interdisciplinary one which

offers a multifaceted look into the social, political, and popular culture of the Middle Ages.

Furthermore, it can also, in particular, offer new insight into Maximilian’s reign and individual

personality. The research for this thesis was conducted by taking a comparative look at these

sources in order to build an all-inclusive picture. Whenever possible, the textual sources have

72 For a comprehensive list of surviving tournament armour specifically affiliated with Maximilian and its provenance, see Appendix 3.

47

been studied in their original ENHG. Many of the above-mentioned Turnierbücher are available

in high-quality digitised copies online through the various libraries which hold them, although,

where possible, they have also been viewed in person. The same is true for images of the arms

and armour in certain collections, although the critical collections in Leeds and Vienna have

been studied in person. Image-focused print sources such as Freydal, Weißkunig, and Theuerdank

are available in modern editions, as are all of the chronicles, letter collections, and documents

consulted. For sources not yet available in print, the Regesta Imperii has been highly valuable,

and its summaries of and quotes from certain archival sources have been used in this thesis

when the originals have been inaccessible. The many volumes of the Regesta Imperii relating to

Maximilian’s lifetime provide useful descriptions of archival sources, such as letters, which are

not yet available in any published form.73

73 J. F. Böhmer, Regesta Imperii XIV: Ausgewählte Regesten des Kaiserreiches unter Maximilian I. 1493-1519, 4 vols (Cologne: Böhlau, 1990-2004).

48

Chapter 2: Tournaments in the Life and Career of Maximilian

2.1 Introduction

Throughout his lifetime (1459-1519), Maximilian hosted, witnessed, and participated in a large

number of tournaments – those meetings of athletic competition focused around the joust or

foot combat and normally involving some element of spectacle. In various ways, tournaments

became an integral part of his life. This chapter will present a study of those which have been

compiled over the course of this research, serving as a wide-ranging and thorough

representation of the various types of tournaments and the occasions for them in which

Maximilian was involved, either as an organiser, a participant, or a spectator.1 The tournaments

span many years, giving us a picture of the way Maximilian kept tournaments a part of his life

throughout his reigns as archduke of Austria, king of the Romans, and Holy Roman emperor.2

This chapter will also provide an integrated discussion of how tournaments featured in the

course of Maximilian’s life and reign alongside the other key events of his lifetime.

This collection of tournaments was brought together using a variety of primarily

written but also pictorial sources. The starting point for locating this information was the

Regesta Imperii (see Chapter 1, Section 1.6).3 This was a particularly valuable resource when the

1 There is, it should be noted, a degree of difficulty in defining what constitutes ‘a tournament’. A tournament could last over a period of months; numerous jousts normally took place over these long stretches of time, and the sources are not normally specific on the exact number. This raises another difficulty: it is often impossible to know if Maximilian was a participant or merely a spectator, although there are, luckily, many instances where he is specifically described as taking part, and his opponent is often named as well. This frequency of participation would lead one to believe that when there is simply a passing reference to a tournament taking place, it is more likely than not that Maximilian was directly involved as a competitor, even when it is impossible to say for sure.

2 For a map of Maximilian’s Holy Roman Empire, see Appendix 1, Figure 1. 3 A search in the Regesta Imperii of the volumes relating to Maximilian’s lifetime (RI XIV

Maximilian I: 1486/1493-1519) yields 71 results for turnier, 110 for rennen, and 67 for stechen.

49

original source was not easily available or accessible. For the most part, however, descriptions

of tournaments have been located across a broad range of source material and from a variety

of cultural perspectives. These are mainly the edited collections of letters, Urkunden, and Akten

described in the introduction, as well as several chronicles, and, in some cases, the illustrated

Turnierbücher.

This chapter will be divided by periods of Maximilian’s life. It will also include an

examination of his Burgundian inheritance, as an understanding of Maximilian must begin with

an understanding of Burgundian culture and history. For a list of the dates, places, and

purposes of the primary tournaments in which Maximilian was involved, including his role in

them, see Table 2 at the end of this chapter. This list encompasses those tournaments which

have been identified thus far. However, there are a variety of caveats that come along with this

undertaking. For one, it is almost certain that those recorded represent only a selective sample

of the total number of tournaments in which Maximilian was involved during his life. Indeed,

it is likely impossible to put forth a specific number of how many tournaments, in total,

Maximilian was involved with during his lifetime. One reason for this is that it is likely many

casual jousts occurred on a frequent basis which were not worthy of mention and simply did

not make their way into any chronicle or official letter which was then archived and preserved.

Many of the jousts which are recorded in reference to Maximilian, as this chapter will show,

sound quite spontaneous, as if they were thrown together on a whim. This means there could

have been countless such jousts organised at the last minute by Maximilian with his

companions who were at hand. These may have been informal occurrences, with little attached

splendour or spectacle, which were simply part of an afternoon’s amusement. There are, as will

be shown in this chapter, several passing references to tournaments like this in various sources.

It is probable that there were just as many which were held but never written about, as they

50

would have been considered insignificant or were not attached to a larger, more noteworthy

event.

2.2 The Burgundian Inheritence and Influences

In 1473 Maximilian travelled to Trier with his father to engage in negotiations with

Charles the Bold over the prospect the marriage of Maximilian and Charles’ daughter Mary.

There as a young man Maximilian met Charles the Bold and experienced Burgundian court

culture for the first time (to which he was much more open than the reserved Frederick).4

Fichtenau speculates that in this lavish court he saw the world of his beloved mother, Eleanor

of Portugal, which he had never before truly experienced. He saw it nicht als Nachklang der

Vergangenheit, sondern als Vorspiel einer reichen und großartigen Zukunft.5 His love of tournaments and

of lavish court culture were steadily growing.

Four years later, in 1477 the eighteen year old Maximilian married the twenty-one year

old Mary of Burgundy, sole heiress to her father’s lands.6 Because of this Mary was the most

eligible woman in Europe and had several suitors competing for her hand, the most prominent

rival to Maximilian being Charles, son of Louis XI of France.7 Later, Juan Luis Vives, a

Valencian scholar, and author of the sixteenth century manual The Education of a Christian

4 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 96-104.

5 ‘not as an echo of the past, but as a prelude to a rich and great future’; Fichtenau, Der Junge Maximilian, p. 18.

6 Mary was the daughter of Charles and his second wife, Isabella of Bourgon. For more on Mary, see Olga Karaskova, ‘“Unq dessoir de cinq degrez”: Mary of Burgundy and the Construction of the Image of the Female Ruler’, in Authority and Gender in Medieval and Renaissance Chronicles, ed. by Juliana Dresvina and Nicholas Sparks (Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars, 2012), pp. 319-44.

7 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 122-36.

51

Woman used Mary of Burgundy (1457-1482) and Maximilian I as a positive example of a good,

healthy marriage:

Mary the wyfe of Maximilian the emperour / whiche had by her father of inheritance all Flanders and Pycatdye / and the people set nought by the symple and softe disposition of Maximilian / and sewed for all theyr matters vnto Mary his wyfe / yet wolde she neuer determyne nothyng without her husbandes aduise / whose will she rekened euer for a lawe / though she myght well inough haue ruled and ordened all as she lyst / with his good wyll: whiche vsed to suffer of his mylde stomacke any thing yet she lyst / vnto his good and prudent wyfe / & that in her owne goodes. So Mary by obeynge her husbande / and regardyng hym so well / brought hym in to great auctorite / and made the people more obedient vnto them both / as though their powers were increased and ayded either by other.8

In this picture Maximilian is once again (as seen in Chapter 1, Section 1.2a), although subtley,

portrayed as not quite up to the task of taking on the rulership of the duchy of Burgundy. It is

to Mary, rather, that the Burgundians look for guidance, and it is only because of her humble

deference to her husband that he is tacitly allowed to assume authority. By working together,

however, Maximilian and Mary strengthen each other, and the picture painted of their marriage

is one of a bond of teamwork and mutual respect. Indeed, Maximilian owed much to Mary, as

the wealth and land brought by her to their marriage in 1477 informed, in many ways, the ruler

he became.

The ritual of the Valois Burgundian court ‘was to be the principal legacy of Burgundy

to early modern Europe’.9 And Maximilian certainly wished to uphold, among all the customs,

the tradition of tournaments, and all the accompanying pageantry involved, during his reign.

Although these tournaments would go on to become something quite different from what was

8 Juan Luis Vives, The Education of a Christian Woman (London: 1529), Early English Books Online: from a copy in the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, DC, pp. 103-04.

9 Boulton, The Knights of the Crown, p. 359.

52

seen in the Burgundian court, Maximilian was undoubtedly influenced by his wife’s homeland

and would continue to manifest this influence throughout his reign.

As a young man, gaining Mary’s hand was an unqualified triumph for Maximilian, for it

meant that he was to become the next duke of Burgundy, inheriting the vast and culturally rich

lands which Mary held. The court culture of Burgundy, in particular, was known for its

lavishness. And a central part of that culture was tournaments. The Englishman John Paston,

describing the Pas de l’Arbre d’Or (the ‘pas of the golden tree’), a tournament held to celebrate

the marriage of Margaret of York, sister to King Edward IV of England, to Charles the Bold in

1468, wrote that ‘as for the Dwkys coort, as of lords, ladys and gentylwomen, knyts, sqwyers,

and gentylmen, I hert never of non lyek to it, save King Artourys cort.’10 A similar impression

was surely made upon the young Maximilian.

The medieval duchy and the free county of Burgundy – two separate entities – are

most frequently associated with their Valois rulers of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

Yet these notably opulent sovereigns and their sumptuous court culture, famous both now and

in its own time, were hardly a long-lasting dynasty. In fact, in total there were only four Valois

dukes of Burgundy: Philip the Bold (1342-1404), John the Fearless (1371-1419), Philip the

Good (1396-1467), and, finally, Charles the Bold (1433-1477). In just over a century, these four

rulers helped Burgundy to become one of the most powerful European states, while striving to

gradually sever their ties to France and become a fully independent power.

The history of Valois-ruled Burgundy begins during the Hundred Years War. In 1356,

when he was only fourteen years old, a young Philip, fourth son of King John the Good of

France, earned a reputation for bravery at the Battle of Poitiers when he stood steadfastly

10 Quoted in Alan Young, Tudor and Jacobean Tournaments (London: George Philip, 1987), p. 22.

53

beside his father in the face of the enemy (it was probably on this occasion that he received the

title ‘the Bold’). Although Philip was the youngest son of the king, for his valour he was

granted the duchy of Burgundy. Through marriage Philip became master of Flanders, one of

the richest and most valuable lands in Europe, as well as the county of Burgundy (distinct from

from the duchy).11 However, as duke of Burgundy, powerful as he was, Philip was still under

the rule of the French crown. Yet Philip continued to expand his power as a ruler in his own

right. From its northernmost to its southernmost extremities, Philip’s domain was about 500

miles; at its widest point, it was about 250 miles. Yet its north-south boundaries were never

contiguous; over the reigns of the four dukes the gap splitting the two halves ranged from

thirty to 185 miles. The northern group was made up of the Low Countries, while the southern

group was concentrated in Burgundy. There were furthermore two Burgundies, the duchy,

which was in France, and the county, which was in the Holy Roman Empire. The people in

these principalities spoke a mix of Romance and Germanic languages.12

It is the third Valois duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good, who is often considered the

paradigm of the Burgundian dukes. Handsome, well-dressed, and skilled at popular chivalric

pursuits like hunting, fencing, dancing, and jousting, Philip the Good was praised by his

contemporaries and well-liked by his subjects. Additionally, he is perhaps most famous for

founding the Order of the Golden Fleece. In 1435, Philip signed the Treaty of Arras with King

Charles VII of France, which established peace between Burgundy and France while also

essentially recognising Burgundy as an independent state. Philip was now freed from feudal

obligation to the French king, although the dukes of Burgundy still held no crown for

11 Richard Vaughan, Valois Burgundy (London: Allen Lane, 1975), pp. 14-18. 12 Vaughan, Valois Burgundy, pp. 22-24; D’Arcy Jonathan Dacre Boulton, ‘The Order of the

Golden Fleece and the Creation of Burgundian National Identity’, in The Ideology of Burgundy:The Promotion of National Consciousness, 1364-1565, pp. 25-27.

54

themselves. A crown and the title of ‘king’ would offer some semblance of unity to the

geographically and culturally diverse Burgundian lands. Burgundy could now stand

comfortably alongside any European kingdom, but it was still a disorganised assembly of

various regions. In pursuit of a crown for himself, Philip entered into negotiations with

Maximilian’s father, Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III, concerning the creation of a distinct

Burgundian kingdom. These negotiations came to nothing, though, and Philip remained, to his

dismay, technically a vassal of both France and the Empire.13

Philip’s son, Charles the Bold, continued this quest for a crown during his own reign.

Charles ascended to power in 1467 and continued the efforts of his forbearers to unify

Burgundy. Above all, Charles was a military man, and he had grand imperial ambitions. He was

constantly at war with France, seeking to escape from subordination to the French king.14 In

November 1473 Charles met with Frederick III at Trier. The ever-ambitious Charles wished to

be more than just a duke and, technically, vassal to the king of France, and he was hoping to

secure a crown and title of ‘king’ for himself, as his father had striven to do before him. It is

possible that he wished to be king of the Romans and even to ascend eventually to the imperial

throne. These were both non-hereditary titles, although it seems highly unlikely that Frederick,

with his own son Maximilian soon entering adulthood, would have granted them to Charles.

And Frederick indeed backed out of negotiations eventually, unwilling to share power with

Charles.15

13 Otto Cartellieri, The Court of Burgundy, trans. by Malcolm Letts (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd, 1929), pp. 9-15.

14 Charles the Bold: Splendour of Burgundy, ed. by Susan Marti, Till-Holger Borchert, and Gabriele Keck (Belgium: Mercatorfonds, 2009), pp. 39-44; Vaughan, Valois Burgundy, pp. 80-82; Cartellieri, The Court of Burgundy, pp. 20-23.

15 Graeme Small, ‘Of Burgundian Dukes, Counts, Saints and Kings (14 C.E. – c. 1500)’ in The Ideology of Burgundy: The Promotion of National Consciousness, 1364-1565, pp. 174-75; Vaughan, Valois Burgundy, pp. 28-30.

55

Charles’ now infamous death came just four years later, on 5 January 1477. He had lain

siege to the city of Nancy, capital of the duchy of Lorraine, in the hopes of uniting his

northern and southern territories. The duke’s armies were leaving their camps when they were

unexpectedly attacked by French forces, and, somewhere in the retreat, Charles was slain. In an

instant, the direct male line of Valois succession to the Burgundian lands, established just over

a century earlier by Charles’ great-grandfather, was broken.16

While Charles never attained a crown of his own through the aid of Frederick III, there

was to be a link between the Valois and the Habsburgs in the form of the 1473 negotiations

between Frederick and Charles over the possible marriage of their children. When Charles was

killed in 1477, there had been no definitive declaration of Mary’s betrothal to any European

prince, although there were many men of note seeking her hand. As Charles’ only child, and

thus heiress to Burgundy, Mary was a much sought-after bride.17 However, Charles had

apparently wished for Mary to choose Maximilian, and in the end Mary was faithful to her

father’s wishes. She married Maximilian just months after Charles’ death.18

Of the four dukes of Burgundy, although they would have had a cumulative influence

on Maximilian, it is Charles the Bold who is the most significant. It was Charles whom

Maximilian would have known personally, whose court Maximilian would have been witness

to, and whose daughter, Mary, he would wed. Through this union, a bond was created between

16 Miller, Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502, pp. 174-73. 17 Mary seems to have been Charles’ only child, either legitimate or illegitimate. Unlike his father

Philip the Good, who was rumoured to have fathered a multitude of illegitimate children from at least thirty-four mistresses, including twenty-six recognised bastards – a common practice in Burgundy – Charles apparently had no mistresses and no children outside of marriage, making Mary’s hand in marriage a great prize indeed: Charles the Bold: Splendour of Burgundy, p. 42.

18 Matthias Pfaffenbichler, ‘Maximilian und Burgund’, in Maximilian I: Der Aufstieg eines Kaisers, von seiner Geburt bis zur Alleinherrschaft 1459-1493, pp. 49-51.

56

the houses of Burgundy and Habsburg, and Maximilian inherited a state and, what is more, a

courtly culture, which would influence his own reign.

In his study of the princely culture of Valois Burgundy, Arjo Vanderjagt divides the

primary roles of the court into two broad areas: activities associated with the Order of the

Golden Fleece and ‘the ideological and political justification of ducal rule as that of a sovereign

prince’.19 Through a display of extravagance at court, the dukes of Burgundy could assert

themselves as equals on the European stage of power, not just through military might but also

through demonstrations of cultural sophistication, artistic patronage, and, when necessary,

over-the-top luxury. Although, as Alistair Miller points out, ‘[t]he use of spectacle and

pageantry was not of course uncommon during the later medieval period’, the Burgundians, as

he puts it, introduced a ‘new sense of exhibitionism and scale’.20 These were lessons which

Maximilian would take to heart.

It was during the reign of the third Valois duke, Philip the Good, that this scale of

Burgundian courtly opulence began to rapidly increase. This is perhaps best exemplified by one

of the most famous events of his reign, the Feast of the Pheasant, staged by Philip in 1454 at

Lille to publicise his desire to launch a crusade against the Turks (a cause Maximilian himself

would later take up). The festivities began with a joust in the marketplace, after which

attendees proceeded to the banquet. The hall was draped in tapestries, and luxurious fabrics

and materials decorated the room. A particularly unusual aspect of the décor were the entremets,

or table entertainments. These could be as simple and as easy to interpret as a cross with a

sounding bell, representing the call to crusade, or as bizarre and indecipherable as a troupe of

19 Arjo Vanderjagt, ‘The Princely Culture of the Valois Dukes of Burgundy’, in Princes and Princely Culture: 1450-1650, vol. 1, p. 54.

20 Miller, Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502, p. 100.

57

musicians seated in a giant pasty, or a magpie seated upon a windmill while people fired arrows

at it. Also on display was a barrel containing good and bad wine, which people could try at

their discretion, and a fabulous fountain of lead and glass which flowed with rosewater and in

the centre of which stood Saint Andrew, the patron saint of Burgundy. Litters bearing the food

were let down from the roof of the hall by cranes, and the feasting was interrupted by

numerous interludes during which musicians played, short plays were performed, and

increasingly elaborate vignettes acted out. The main entertainment of the evening involved a

fearsome giant, representing a Saracen, and female figure, representing the Church, in a tower

on the back of an elephant, lamenting her state. The feast culminated with Philip being

presented with a live pheasant, and he and those other nobles present promising oaths to take

up the call to crusade.21

More similarities to Maximilian’s own rule may be found in these ostentatious displays.

In the view of that eminent historian Johan Huizinga, the Feast of the Pheasant was no more

than an out-of-touch, nostalgic revival of a dying medieval tradition. It should be seen as no

more than an extravagant indulgence in an old form of ritual not to be taken seriously, even by

those involved; the superficial pomp was simply a way for the aristocracy to play-act and laugh

at themselves.22 Yet the reasons behind Philip the Good’s famous feast are likely far more

canny and rational. The purpose of this feast was publicity, pure and simple. It was a way for

Philip to promote the desired crusade to the nobles present and, critically, to the public who

witnessed it from a viewing gallery. These observers could then spread tales of what they saw

to others and circulate the much-desired crusader message. The pageantry involved was not

21 Cartellieri, The Court of Burgundy, pp. 140-50; Miller, Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502, pp. 76-78.

22 Johan Huizinga, The Waning of the Middle Ages (London: Edward Arnold & Co., 1924), pp. 80-81.

58

just for the amusement of the participants, or a chance to show off Burgundian wealth, but

was serving a carefully calculated purpose. It was a means of conveying a message, for Philip

did not have the resources to launch such a campaign on his own.23 Thus, as they did with

many other things, the Valois dukes used their extravagant courtly displays as a tool to serve a

specific purpose, whether it was political manoeuvring or encouraging unification or

promoting a crusade. This was a method which, in later years, Maximilian himself would take

up.

The dukes’ propagandistic efforts and their generations-long development of courtly

ritual and cultural extravagance culminated under Charles the Bold. For ducal festivities,

numerous short-term works were commissioned by Charles; entremets continued to enjoy

popularity, and one could also find fountains which flowed with wine, architecture constructed

temporarily for certain events, and decorations and costumes which were made to be used only

once. Yet Charles patronised numerous long-term projects as well. Court artists were

commissioned to produce paintings and portraits, tapestries were designed, as well as gold and

silverware objects. Items like clocks, automata, chandeliers, and mirrors were also

commissioned by Charles for the benefit of the Burgundian dynasty. As duke, he strove to

foster an image of both artistic and literary patron. The epics and romances which he had

translated and with which he filled the ducal library were often ones which provided ideal

chivalric models and inspiration to members of the court. Upon his marriage Maximilian

inherited the library of the Burgundian dukes, which contained not only histories of the house

of Valois but chivalric tales as well, like the legends of Arthur, popular mythology, and stories

of Alexander, Hannibal, and Caesar, as well as books on hunting.24 This collection may have

23 Miller, Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502, pp. 65-70. 24 Fichtenau, Der Junge Maximilian (1459-1482), pp. 44-45.

59

had an influence on the sorts of works Maximilian was later interested in producing to

commemorate his own reign – yet another way Burgundy influenced the ruler. Each of these

elements was part of a careful choreography of power executed by Charles. There was

deliberate reasoning behind each one. Objects such as paintings and tapestries often

commemorated Valois ancestors, both real and legendary.25 Again, this was a technique which

Maximilian would later adopt enthusiastically in commissioning his own geneology.

The Burgundian court became an example for other rulers and was either directly

copied by other European princes or at least influenced them in some way. It was an archetype

for King Edward IV of England, for one, who requested a treatise from Burgundian chronicler

Olivier de la Marche on the running of the court. This manuscript, titled État de la maison du duc

Charles de Bourgogne, details the structure and organisation of the ducal household, as well as its

ceremonial functions. Essentially, it was a guidebook for a king who wished to raise the profile

of his court. And Edward IV was not the only one to make use of this treatise.26 Significantly,

Maximilian also possessed a copy, which served as a manual for both him and his son, Philip

the Fair. In this way, ‘[t]he Burgundian princely court thus became something of a model for

rituals of the representation of political power and for cultural tastes’.27 Critically, the court

managed to combine both the impression of strong rulership with the distinctions of

refinement and good taste.

Finally, one further crucial element of Burgundian courtly culture was the Order of the

Golden Fleece.28 Monarchical orders, made up of knights and nobles and dedicated to

25 Charles the Bold: Splendour of Burgundy, pp. 51-61. 26 Miller, Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502, pp. 59-63 27 Vanderjagt, ‘The Princely Culture of the Valois Dukes of Burgundy’, p. 64. 28 A collection of the heraldry associated with members of the Order has been preserved in the

lavishly illustrated manuscript in Paris, Bibliothèque National, Ms. Arsenal 479, Le Grand Armorial de la Toison d’Or.

60

promoting the ideals of chivalry were popular in many princely courts. However, these unique

societies had, according to D’Arcy Boulton, largely fallen out of favour by 1390, with relatively

few being maintained due to the commitment and expense required.29 Yet this would all

change in 1430, as the Valois dukes made their own foray into the realm of knightly orders

with the foundation of the Ordre de la Thoison d’Or, or the Order of the Golden Fleece.30 The

Order was founded by the third Valois duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good. This action was

just another way to elevate Burgundy to the same level as England and France, who each had

their own well-established knightly orders.31 The proclamation of Philip’s intention to form his

own order was announced amidst a series of lavish festivities, including feasting and

tournaments.32

Burgundian dukes faced a difficulty which Maximilian himself would later face as

emperor: ruling lands which were spread out over a wide geographical area and encompassed

people of different cultures and languages. The Order of the Golden Fleece was used by the

dukes as a tool in these circumstances. It could be used to promote loyalty to the Valois

dynasty and serve as a symbol of their power. Not only were symbols of the Order

incorporated into the heraldic arms of many of its members, but they were also often displayed

29 D’Arcy Jonathan Dacre Boulton, The Knights of the Crown: The Monarchical Orders of Knighthood in Later Medieval Europe, 1325-1520 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1987), pp. 103, 356-58.

30 The fleece after which the Order was named could refer to two different tales. The most well-known was the golden fleece of Colchis, taken by Jason and the Argonauts of classical Greek legend. This heroic story was an apt one for the chivalric principles promoted by the Order; however, Jason was a pagan hero and not infallible So, instead, a new ‘fleece’ was found, and the Order’s name was declared instead to refer to the fleece of the humble biblical hero Gideon. This connection was tenuous, as this fleece was not golden, nor was it a trophy for brave actions, but the story was deemed more suitable for the Order. Still later, other fleeces would be invoked to represent the Order. Huizinga, The Waning of the Middle Ages, pp. 76-77, Boulton, The Knights of the Crown, pp. 367-69.

31 England’s the Order of the Garter and the France’s the Company of the Star, founded by Philip the Good’s own great-grandfather, King John the Good of France. Philip was, in fact, elected to membership in England’s Order of the Garter in 1422, an offer which he did not accept, possibly in order not to tie himself too closely to England. Boulton, The Knights of the Crown, p. 358.

32 Boulton, The Knights of the Crown, pp. 360-62.

61

in public places and cities.33 In this way, even when not physically present, the dukes could

remind citizens of their authority and continue to assert their dominance through the power of

imagery. The creation of the Order was part of Valois efforts to create a sense of Burgundian

nationality.34

By endowing the Order with such prestige, Philip was at the same time making the

position of sovereign of the Order of the Golden Fleece one of significant power. It conveyed

prestige and status to its holder, elevating him above other ordinary dukes and giving them an

aura of kingship.35 Philip maintained the Order until his death on 15 June 1467, at which time

Charles the Bold took over as sovereign. Although Charles’ reign was often turbulent, he

upheld to Order until his untimely death in 1477, after which Maximilian became the third

sovereign of the Order upon his marriage to Mary, just as he assumed the title of duke of

Burgundy. By assuming this role as sovereign, Maximilian was laying claim to the preeminent

symbol of the Burgundian dukes.

A question which has been much debated is whether the death of Charles the Bold at

Nancy in 1477 and the marriage of his daughter Mary to Maximilian of Austria represents the

collapse of Burgundy. How much continuity may be found between the Valois and the

Habsburg ruled Burgundy? Charles had no sons, legitimate or otherwise, to carry on the Valois

33 Vanderjagt, ‘The Princely Culture of the Valois Dukes of Burgundy’, p. 59. 34 The insignia of the Order was a representation of Burgundian unity in itself and was a

combination of several Burgundian elements. The collar of the Order incorporated the cross of Saint Andrew with the secular badge of the dukes – the flaming flint and steel, or fusil – and the pelt of the much-debated golden fleece. The chain of the collar was formed of interlocking fusils in the shape of B’s. Maximilian can be seen wearing this collar in several of his own portraits. Boulton, ‘The Order of the Golden Fleece and the Creation of Burgundian National Identity’, pp. 27, 33-35.

35 Boulton, ‘The Order of the Golden Fleece and the Creation of Burgundian National Identity’, pp. 28.

62

legacy, and his only daughter’s marriage to the son of the Holy Roman Empire meant that

another dynasty was bringing Burgundy into their fold.

Richard Vaughan has stated explicitly, ‘Burgundy fell with Charles the Bold on the

battlefield of Nancy on 5 January 1477.’36 He further claims that there was political decline

within the territories prior to and during Charles’ reign, leading to a slow degradation of

Burgundy, with Charles’ death as the final straw. When Maximilian married Mary, he had no

experience of Burgundian administration, and he was not welcomed with open arms by all

Burgundian citizens, as the above quote from Vives shows. Within weeks of the Battle of

Nancy, Louis XI had retaken the duchy of Burgundy, the original heart of the dukes’ power.

The new Burgundy, over which Maximilian ruled, was structurally different and took on a new,

distinctly Habsburg significance, soon to be, Vaughan argues, completely overwhelmed by the

Renaissance and early modern era.37

However, arguments have been made more recently that this is not the case, and that

the death of Charles the Bold did not necessarily equate to the death of Burgundy. Graeme

Small disagrees with the idea that the entity of Burgundy disappeared with Charles.38 The idea

that a complex political entity, built up for over a century, would simply collapse in a moment

following the Battle of Nancy does not seem logical. There is more continuity to be found

between the two reigns than not. Many courtiers, such as the chronicler Olivier de la Marche,

36 Vaughan, Valois Burgundy, p. 194. 37 Vaughan, Valois Burgundy, p. 194. 38 Small, ‘Of Burgundian Dukes, Counts, Saints and Kings (14 C.E. – c. 1500),’ p. 178. This idea

is largely based on the assumption that, with Charles’ death, the Burgundian territories were divided between the Holy Roman Empire and the kingdom of France. And Maximilian’s ascendency to Burgundian power did also, admittedly, coincide with a period of strife for the territories, as they were facing dual threats from both France and the Flemish cities. The old duchy of Burgundy was also lost to the French crown later in 1477.

63

who had served the Valois dukes went on to serve Maximilian and his successors, a sign that

there still existed the concept of a ‘Burgundy’ to serve.

The continuation of the Order of the Golden Fleece can be seen as another indicator

of continuity. There were initial fears that France’s Louis XI might take possession of the

Order, but Maximilian revived it and became sovereign himself, holding his first meeting in

1478. The Order was a major icon of Burgundy, and by taking it up and, in turn, passing it on

to his own son, was a strategically clever move for Maximilian, as it lent further credence to his

rule. He was able to claim four powerful foreign monarchs as members of the Order – Edward

IV of England, John of Aragon and Navarre, Ferdinand of Naples, and Ferdinand of Castile –

illustrating his international prestige.39 Indeed, it was the magnificence of the court, the

trademark of the Valois dukes, which Maximilian endeavoured to preserve and maintain,

although it would continue to evolve in new directions under his rule. It remained a centre of

cultural patronage and a site of elaborate festivals and displays of pageantry. Maximilian would

adopt this ethos and perpetuate it, attempting to assume the mantle of Valois extravagance.

The personality of Maximilian, his inheritance of Burgundian lands, and the prevalent

tournament culture of the time all came together in a perfect concordance, allowing

Maximilian to build a court which presented tournaments unlike any seen before. Maximilian

was undoubtedly influenced by Burgundy, which was the leading example at the time in

Europe of elevated courtly culture for those in the neighboring Habsburg territories. In

Burgundy, Maximilian would have witnessed new art and culture, luxurious court life, fabulous

hunts and tournaments, as well as dances and celebrations, with Charles the Bold reigning over

39 Miller, Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502, pp. 178-88; 203-209.

64

all as the ultimate example of knightly success.40 Following his marriage to Mary, Maximilian’s

time in the Burgundian court in Ghent pleased him greatly, and there he experienced

tournaments and banquets and dances in the Burgundian style.41 Such a scenario does support

the idea put forth by Wiesflecker that Maximilian’s time in Netherlands immediately after his

marriage was the time of his longest and most influential exposure to Burgundian court life, as

well as his happiest period. It opened him up to new possibilities. Most significantly, placed in

great prominence in the Burgundian court as a requisite activity for a young man, following

war and the hunt, was the tournament.42

Still, in many ways, Maximilian was far removed from his natural environment as a

duke of Burgundy, as it was far removed from the culture he had been born into. In such an

environment, the only place he could present himself as an unquestioned equal to the

Burgundian elite society around him was in hunting or in the tournament. And he always was

trying to prove himself. Previous Valois dukes of Burgundy would never have attempted to

write or commission books on the immense variety of subjects which Maximilian hoped to

produce.43 Maximilain was a planner on a grand scale. He found new and innovative ways to

use the tournament, both during his own lifetime in the activities of his court, and in the works

he produced commemorating his reign. Fichtenau admirably compares the approaches of

Maximilian and the Valois dukes when he says,

40 Klaus Brandstätter, ‘Aspekte der Festkultur unter Maximilian’, in Maximilian I. (1459-1519): Wahrnehmung – Übersetzungen – Gender, p. 159.

41 Größing, Maximilian I.: Kaiser, Künstler, Kämpfer, pp. 70-71. Größsing paints a romantic picture of Mary watching Maximilian prove himself as a skilful tournament competitor and growing his reputation while she and her ladies, all elaborately dressed, look on.

42 Wiesflecker, Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches, pp. 62-63. 43 Maximilian produced or wanted to produce hunting and fishing books, armoury books,

genealogies, tournament books, commemorative works of art; his elaborately designed tomb in Innsbruck (even though he does not actually rest there) is also another example of this. Fichtenau, Der Junge Maximilian, pp. 43-44.

65

Seine [Maximilian’s] Leistung sollte ihn von den anderen unterscheiden, nicht in steifes Zeremoniell ihn über die adelige Gesellschaft emporheben. Er hat die Ritterspiele sozusagen ‘privatisiert’: Was in Burgund mit Wappenschau, Aufzug, Preisverteilung und ähnlichem verbunden war, wurder zur sportlichen Uebung, die mit den gerade anwesenden Gästen vor dem Abendessen betrieben warden mochte.44

2.3 Archduke of Austria and King of the Romans

Maximilian was born 22 March 1459 in Wiener Neustadt, Austria, the son of Holy Roman

Emperor Frederick III and Eleanor of Portugal (1434-1467). As a young man, he held the title

of archduke of Austria, as the Habsburg family had been the dominant rulers in that area for

centuries.45 Yet Maximilian’s childhood was not marked by great prosperity or glamour.

According to Heinrich Fichtenau, war and hunger would have been Maximilian’s first

childhood impressions growing up in the court of his father, Frederick III, which was not an

affluent one.46 This is rather unlike the glorious images of princely education presented in later

works produced by Maximilian, like Weißkunig. Still, in his childhood home of Wiener

Neustadt, Maximilian did begin to receive the requisite princely training in the mental as well as

the physical arts which were to appear later in that more glorified version. At this time, while

he was still a child in reality and before he could go back and reconstruct his childhood as he

may have preferred it, Maximilian was already indicating a fascination with the tournament.

This is perfectly demonstrated in a childhood doodle preserved in one of Maximilian’s

44 ‘His [Maximilian’s] accomplishment should distinguish him from others, not elevate him in stiff ritual above noble society. He ‘privatised’, so to speak, the tournament: What was connected in Burgundy with heraldry, elevation [in society], distribution of prizes, and the like became a sporting exercise, which would be conducted with the guests present before dinner’; Fichtenau, Der Junge Maximilian, p. 46.

45 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 65-87.

46 Fichtenau, Der Junge Maximilian, pp. 11-12.

66

Lehrbücher.47 In the margins, like any bored schoolchild, a youthful Maximilian has sketched a

picture of himself as a knight on horseback holding a lance.48

This fascination is later illustrated retrospectively in Weißkunig.49 In one image from

Maximilian’s pseudo-biography, Maximilian, identifiable by his long hair and crown of laurels,

is pictured training in all physical skills required of a young prince, including wrestling and

archery with both a longbow and crossbow. He is also seen playing with toys representing

jousting knights on horseback.50 As an adult Maximilian no longer had to be content with

drawing the jousting knight; he could instead grant his younger self in retrospect elaborate toys

with which to play.

As mentioned above, following his marriage to Mary of Burgundy Maximilian lived

many happy years of his youth in the Netherlands, a principal cultural centre of late medieval

Europe, where he was exposed to music and art and cultural exchange. Such a life stood in

contrast to one which might have been lived in the traditional capitals of the Habsburg

emperors, such as Wiener Neustadt, Graz, and Vienna, which were isolated on the eastern

edges of the Empire.51 It also stood in contrast to life in his father, Frederick III’s court

(despite the impression later highly romanticised accounts in Weißkunig might try to give).52

47 See Appendix 1, Figure 2. 48 Heinrich Fichtenau, ed., Die Lehrbücher Maximilians I. und die Anfänge der Frakturschrift

(Hamburg: Maximilian Gesellschaft, 1961), plate 43. The Lehrbücher of Maximilian are a fascinating study in their decoration, academic exercises, and what they reveal about princely education. See also Ein Lehrbuch für Maximilian I. (Codex Ser.n. 2617, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna) (Salzburg: Andreas & Andreas, 1981).

49 See Appendix 1, Figure 3. 50 Der Weißkunig: Eine Erzehlung von den Thaten Kaiser Maximilian des Ersten (Vienna: Kurzböck,

1775), plate 15. Such toys existed in real life. Two examples are preserved in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna: Inv.-Nr. P 81, P 92.

51 Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music, p. 18. 52 For more on the court life of Frederick III, see Paul-Joachim Heinig, ‘Reich und Adel in der

Epoche Kaiser Friedrichs III.’, in König, Fürsten und Reich im 15. Jahrhundert, ed. by Franz Fuchs, Paul-Joachim Heinig, and Jörg Schwarz (Cologne: Böhlau, 2009) pp. 193-211.

67

Soon, however, Maximilian was forced to become an active leader and to defend his

new Burgundian territorial acquisitions from the king of France, Louis XI. In this he was

successful, defeating the French at the Battle of Guinegate in 1479 – the first major battle of

the young archduke’s life. Maximilian’s victory was due, in large part, to his revolutionising of

his military forces, which began around this time. Inspired by the fighting techniques of Swiss

mercenary pikemen, Maximilian began to utilise infantry forces and staff weapons against

cavalry in ways never done before. These specialised troops became known as the

Landesknechte; they have become a central part of Maximilian’s legacy and are a further

indication of his passion for innovation in forms of combat, whether military (as in the

Landesknechte) or chivalric (as in tournaments).53

Sadly, Mary and Maximilian’s marriage was short-lived. Mary died in 1482 following a

fall from her horse while she was out hunting. By all accounts, their match had been a truly

romantic one, and Maximilian was devastated by her loss. Mary and Maximilian had two

children who survived to adulthood: Philip (‘the Fair’) (1478-1506) and Margaret of Austria

(1480-1530).54 Maximilian was now in the precarious position of having to hold together his

own German and Austrian lands with his Burgundian territories without the help of his

Burgundian wife. Maximilian was forced to sign the Treaty of Arras in 1482, which returned

53 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 144-54.

54 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 160-64. Philip would go on to become Duke of Burgundy under Maximilian’s guardianship following his mother’s death. He married Juana of Castille (1479-1555), sometimes known as ‘Juana the Mad’, and their son, Charles V, became Holy Roman emperor after Maximilian’s death. Margaret was married twice, and, after the death of both her husbands, she went on to become a successful ruler in her own right, serving as governor of the Netherlands after her brother’s death and as guardian to his son Charles.

68

sovereignty of several territories to the French king while agreeing to the betrothal of young

Margaret to Chalres VIII of France.55

In 1485, however, Maximilian’s star was on the rise again, as his father elected him to

be king of the Romans. This was a much needed boost to Maximilian’s profile on the

European stage at this time, and, as such, it was to be marked as an occasion of great

importance.56 On 8 March 1486, Frederick, Maximilian, and other princes, counts, and nobles

arrived in Frankfurt to crown Maximilian. The title of ‘king of the Romans’ was the closest

equivalent to a German king. It was often held as a preliminary royal title by those likely to

become Holy Roman emperor, and it was commonly used to secure the title in the future for a

chosen heir, in this case Maximilian by Frederick III. Roman kings, however, were crowned in

Germany, while Holy Roman emperors were anointed in Rome.57

On 31 March the party travelled to Cologne, where Maximilian was crowned by the

archbishop of that city.58 Present in positions of prominence were many high ranking nobles of

the empire, including respected elder statesmen Count Palatine of the Rhine Philip (1448-

1508), Duke Ernst of Saxony (1441-1486), and, of especial note, Duke Adolf of Cleves.59

55 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 165-67.

56 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 182-94.

57 Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music, pp. 1-2, 33. Neither title was hereditary. 58 Several German sources exist which recount this event, including Krönung Erzherzog Maximilians

zu einem römischen König (Augsburg: Anton Sorg, 15th century), Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Ink. 18.C.19; Eugen Schneider, ‘Johan Reuchlins Berichte über die Krönung Maximilians I. in Jahre 1486’, Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins, 52 (1898), 547-559; and Coronatio Maximiliani (Mainz: Peter Schoeffer, 15th century) Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Ink. 2.H.111 and Coronatio Maximiliani I., archiducis Austriae, in regem Romanorum (Hanover: 1613), Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Ink. 28.V.30 – two editions of the same account.

59 Duke Adolf of Cleves (1425-1492), lord of Ravenstein and Winnendahl, was the nephew of Duke Philip the Good of Burgundy and was raised in his court. He belonged to Burgundian courtly nobility and was a leading captain in the Burgundian military. His second wife, Anna, was the daughter of Philip the Good. He was also one Burgundy’s most celebrated tournament heroes and a knight of the Golden Fleece (since 1456). He appeared as the ‘Knight of the Swan’ at the Tournament of the

69

Before Maximilian’s coronation in February 1486 in Frankfurt, father and son filled their time

with an endless round of feasts and festivities which included, in a prominent role,

tournaments.60 One account, written in Latin, mentions hastiludia (tournaments) being held on

the final Saturday of the festivities amongst all the German nobles and princes remaining there

before they returned to their homelands.61 Maximilian himself took part in the jousting.62

A reference to these events may also be found in the writings of the French chronicler

Jean Molinet. During this time of merriment, joustes were often recorded as being one of the

standard expressions of celebration, along with dances and banquets to honour the très

victorieux et très illustre prince l’archiduc Maximilian.63 For example, to pass the time, a joust was

held between two knights à la mode d’Alemaigne (‘in the German style’).64 In his writing, Molinet

continuously refers to these events using the terms joustes (noun – plural) or joustérent (verb –

plural). No explicit, literal phrase for ‘tournament’ is featured.

Swan (1454), hosted by Philip the Good. At the wedding of Margaret of York to Charles the Bold of Burgundy (1468) he jousted against the Baron of Scales, brother-in-law to King Edward IV of England. He acted as governor of the Netherlands by appointment of Duke Charles in his absence during the Lorraine campaign (1475). Upon the death of Charles, Mary of Burgundy named him governor of Hainault (1477-82). Both he and his brother campaigned for their sons to wed Mary, but Maximilian’s ascension did not change his standing in court. He was also the one who made Maximilian a knight of the Golden Fleece, and he was godfather to his son, the young archduke Philip. After the death of Mary, he was responsible for the guardianship and education of the young prince, which took place primarily in Mechlin, along with the assistance of Olivier de la Marche.

60 There are also the jousts in which the young archduke of Austria, Maximilian, may have participated in as a teenager, before he came into the spotlight when he married the high profile Mary of Burgundy, or when was crowned king of the Romans, as well as the mounted jousts or foot combats which may have qualified as a form of knightly training for the young Maximilian, although whether or not he could be said to be truly ‘competing’ in such an environment is debatable. Such possible events are well-documented in works like Weißkunig, but these are not historically verifiable sources.

61 Coronatio Maximiliani I., archiducis Austriae, in regem Romanorum, p. 22: Sic per dies quatuordecim magna consilia habuerunt. Quid conclusum est, exspectemus cum patientia. Etiam Principes hastiludia fecerut inter se; & post multa consilia Principes separate suns, quilibet ad terram suam.

62 Krönung Erzherzog Maximilians zu einem römischen König, p. 17. 63 Molinet, Chroniques, vol. 1, p. 469. Mentioned by Molinet are: cerimonies, entréez, receptions, joustes,

bancquetz, festoyemens, nouvelletéz, singularitéz, honneurs et magnificences que nous appellons triumphes. 64 Molinet, Chroniques, vol. 1, p. 471. The German-style is an oft-used descriptive term in the

language used at this time relating to tournaments. More on the meaning and significance of these terms will follow in a later chapter.

70

After Maximilian’s coronation as king of the Romans, however, he still continued to be

beset by troubles, including continued war with France over his Burgundian territories, and he

also faced uprisings in the Netherlands. In 1488, he was even held captive for over three

months by the citizens of Bruges in a conflict over taxation.65 It became vital that the young

ruler prove himself capable, and tournaments began to come to the fore as a way of putting on

a show of strength.

One well-recorded tournament involving the now king of the Romans occurred over

the Christmas and New Year period of 1489-90, beginning on the day before All Saints’ Day (1

November). Like the tournaments which accompanied Maximilian’s 1486 coronation, these

individual jousts were part of a long, festive period, and not the isolated events of a single day.

This tournament was documented visually in the mid-sixteenth century Turnierbuch, BSB,

Cod.icon 398.66 This particular tournament was held in Linz and was hosted jointly by

Frederick III and Maximilian, together with Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary. Mathias I,

Corvinus (1443-1490), was at war with Frederick III frequently throughout his reign. This

tournament was held not long after the two rulers reached peace terms, and shortly before

Mathias’ death in April 1490, presumably as a display of peace and concordance.67

65 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 207-216.

66 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 13: Der Allerdurchleüchtigist Groβmechtigist un übermindtlichist Kaiser Friderich mit sampt seinem geliebten sün Maximilian Romischer Kunig im vierzehenhundert und neun unnd achzigigisten Jar hielten am tag zue Linz mit dem Konig von Ungern da haben dise nachgeschribnen herren dises Ritterlich spil gehalten wie hernach volgt (‘The most royal, most powerful, and most eminent Emperor Frederick, together with his beloved son Maximilian, king of the Romans, in 1489 met on the same day in Linz with the king of Hungary; there these aforesaid lords held these knightly games, as hereafter follows’)

67 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 288-96.

71

Again Maximilian appeared as a participant in the mounted jousts. He jousted twice,

both times against Anthony von Yfan.68 The first occasion was on Saint Barbara’s Day (4

December), and the second on the first Saturday (4 January) of the new year, 1490. This

second joust was explicitly described as a Scheiben Rennen. This is a critical detail, as it applies a

descriptive label to a certain style of joust. Otherwise, the phrase most commonly used to

describe the act of jousting in this manuscript is the verb phrase haben […] gerennt, meaning

simply, ‘they ran’. The noun Rennen, derived from this verb rennen (‘to run’), is also a proper

name for a specific style of German joust, as will be explained in Chapter 3. The origin of this

connection may be seen in this wording.

This manuscript only illustrates twelve individual competitions of mounted joust.

These are likely, however, to only be a selection of the entire number of jousts which took

place over this time. Those twelve illustrated may represent the most famous of the

combatants.

Maximilian’s fortunes continued to fluctuate. In 1490, Maximilian has a stroke of good

luck when he inherited the region of Tyrol from his cousin, the archduke Sigismund of

Austria. This inheritance included the city of Innsbruck, which was to become one of

Maximilian’s most favoured residences.69 Also in 1490, however, Maximilian married the young

heiress Anne of Brittany (1477-1514) by proxy. This marriage failed spectacularly when Anne

repudiated the unconsummated marriage and instead married the dauphin of France, Charles

VIII, who had until then been betrothed to Maximilian’s own daughter, Margaret. Thus both

Maximilian and Margaret were deprived of their intended spouses, and Maximilian

68 Anthony von Yfan was a figure of some significance – a frequent competitor in the jousts of Maximilian’s highly mobile court. For more on von Yfan, see Chapter 6, Section 6.4.b.

69 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 248-50.

72

subsequently did all in his power to ensure that marriages arranged for his descendents were

designed to keep power out of French hands.70

The Turnierbuch BSB, Cod.icon 398 provides a record of another tournament held the

next year, in June 1491.71 This tournament took place in Nuremberg. Maximilian was again

among the participants, in this case jousting against Christoph Schenk von Limpurg.72 Again,

the joust is given a particular label: a Schwaiff. In an extraordinary overlap, this tournament was

also documented in another Turnierbuch, that of Johann of Saxony, who was also among the

participants.73 This documentation in a second source is significant in that it lends veracity to

the first.

Johann of Saxony’s Turnierbuch includes another tournament in which Maximilian was

involved; this one was held in Innsbruck in 1492 (month unspecified). Maximilian is illustrated

once in the manuscript, jousting against Johann. The elector himself is depicted competing in

seven different jousts against various nobles at this tournament.74

70 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 323-26.

71 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 47: Der hochgeboren Romischer Kunig Maximilian rit zue Norenburg auf die ban im vierzehenhundert unnd im ain und neunzigisten jar das geschach darnach auf dem Rathaus bey nacht vil der freuden spil wurden gehalten bey jungen edelleuten undalte. Am Montag vor S. Baptista tag das mancher edler zue der erden lag, wa man noch solche Ritterliche spil thet treiben wurden vil unrath und zwitracht dahin den blieben (‘The highborn Roman King rode to Nuremberg along the road in the year 1491, there took place at the town hall in the night many of the joyful games were held by nobles young and old. On the Monday before Saint Baptista’s Day, when many a knight lay on the earth, where yet such knightly games were taking place amid much restlessness and conflict.’)

72. Christoph Schenk von Limpurg, Christoph (c. 1468-c. 1515) was the son of Albrecht II and part of a noble Swabian family. The name comes from ownership of Limpurg castle at Schwäbisch Hall. He was a leading military captain in the Austrian territories and an ally of Maximilian. He often participated in Maximilian’s tournaments and travelled with Maximilian’s court. The title Schenk could come from schenken and refer to the medieval profession of wine-server or cup-bearer, possibly from a historic role in the coronations of German kings and emperors. ‘Schenk von Limpurg’ appears to have become a complete last name unit associated with this family.

73 Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, plates 38, 39, 41, 44, 45-48. 74 Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, plates 50-52, 54, 90-92. Unfortunately, none of these

encounters are included in this reprinted edition.

73

2.4 Maximilian as Emperor and the Establishment of Tournaments in his Court

In 1493 Frederick III died, leaving Maximilian as his widely acknowledged successor as Holy

Roman emperor (although he would not actually be officially crowned until many years later).75

As he became a powerful ruler in his own right, Maximilian began to, more and more, place

tournaments in a critical role in his court. This dominant role of the tournament in a royal

court, however, was built on a long-standing medieval tradition. For hundreds of years, the

tournament, in one form or another, had featured in noble courts as a form of military

training, athletic competition, and entertainment. It served several purposes during these

centuries.

In its earliest form, as stated above, the tournament was primarily a martial exercise,

allowing knights to hone and perfect skills which would be crucial to them on the battlefield.

This iteration of the tournament also allowed knights to show off their athleticism and

equestrian abilities in a chivalric setting, both to each other and to the growing contingent of

spectators which came to witness the events. Alongside this, there was also the opportunity for

wealth and renown to be gained on the tournament scene. Later, there was also the obvious

role of the tournament in providing courtly entertainment and as a pastime not just for knights

but for audiences as well. These same factors also influenced the tournament’s prevalence in

German-speaking courts and formed part of the tradition of which Maximilian’s own court

was the natural continuation.76

75 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 351-55.

76 The tournaments which took place in noble courts like Maximilian’s and which are the subject of this thesis are distinctly different from those held by the German tournament societies, or Turniergesellschaften, which were also popular around this time (the Turnierbuch of Marx Walther is as much of an overlap as will be found in this present study). Not much has been written about the

74

When he at last (although unofficially) became Holy Roman emperor, Maximilian’s

court was a unique entity, made so by several factors. Firstly, its makeup was unusual. This was

due to the nature of the territories which Maximilianruled. As a monarch, Maximilian held

many titles at different times in his life: first as archduke of Austria and king of the Romans,

then Holy Roman emperor, as well as duke of Burgundy following his inheritances from Mary

of Burgundy. Combined, each of these titles brought Maximilian a wealth of land but also a

highly disparate collection of cultures and languages (not all of which always welcomed

Maximilian as a ruler) across a wide, often unmanageable, geographic spread. As a result, the

members of Maximilian’s court were drawn from a broad range of homelands. On top of this,

as Holy Roman emperor, Maximilian ruled a large number of princes – rulers and large land-

holders in their own rights. These men’s support and loyalty were critical to Maximilian. All of

this would have placed great responsibility on Maximilian, as one of the pre-eminent European

monarchs, to run his court smoothly, as well as to make it a centre of unquestionable power

for the emperor.77 Tournaments would continue to aid him in this mission.

In addition, in order to bring further stability to his rule, in 1494 Maximilian married

again. This time it proved more successful than his thwarted marriage to Anne of Brittany.

Maximilian chose for his second wife Bianca Maria Sforza of Milan (1472-1510). Bianca Maria

Turniergesellschaften of the late Middle Ages as a separate entity from the knightly societies, or Rittergesellschaften (although the two often intertwined). Piccolruaz Alexander, ‘Turniere und Turniergesellschaften des Spätmittelalters’ (unpublished master’s thesis, Leopold-Franzens-Universität, Innsbruck, 1993), pp. 97-99 provides a list of the main tournaments held by these societies in the latter half of the fifteenth century and their winners. See also: Andreas Ranft, Adelgesellschaften: Gruppenbildung und Genossenschaft im spätmittelalterlichen Reich (Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 1994) and Werner Meyer, ‘Turniergesellschaften. Bemerkungen zur sozialgeschichtlichen Bedeutung der Turniere im Spätmittelalter’ in Das ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter, pp. 500-12.

77 For a further discussion of Maximilian’s court, see Paula S. Fichtner, The Habsburgs: Dynasty, Culture and Politics; Fichtner, ‘The Politics of Honor: Renaissance Chivalry and Habsburg Dynasticism’, in Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance, 29 (1967), 567-80; Franz Fuchs, Paul-Joachim Heinig, and Jörg Schwarz, eds, König, Fürsten und Reich im 15. Jahrhundert (Köln: Böhlau Verlag, 2009).

75

was the daughter of Duke Galeazzo Sforza and niece to Ludovico Sforza, who became duke of

Milan after his brother was assassinated. The Sforzas were a powerful and wealthy family, and

Bianca Maria brought a considerable dowry with her to the union. Unlike Maximilian’s first

marriage, however, this marriage was never a happy one. Maximilian and Bianca Maria never

had any children, and, after a short while, they largely kept separate courts and rarely saw each

other.78

Still, the wedding itself was cause for celebration, and there are records of several

tournaments taking place in 1494 around the time of the marriage. The first was held in

January in one of Maximilian’s most favoured cities, Innsbruck, and was part of the

celebrations organised by the archduchess Katharina of Austria in honour of the arrival of

Maximilian’s second wife, Bianca Maria Sforza, in the city.79 These events were documented in

the letters of the Italian envoy Guido Manfredi as well as the Milanese noblewoman Barbara

Crivelli Stampi on 15 and 24 January. They described tournaments being held on a daily basis

with great pomp, along with dancing and stag hunts in the mountains (all this in spite of a fire

breaking out in the ducal palace). Although it was not specifically stated, Maximilian would

very likely have participated in these tournaments, and he certainly would have taken part in

the hunting.80

78 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 1, pp. 363-72. Not a great deal has been written on Bianca Maria. One source is Sabine Weiss, Die Vergessene Kaiserin: Bianca Maria Sforza, Kaiser Maximilians Zweite Gemahlin (Innsbruck: Tyrolia Verlag 2010).

79 Katharina of Saxony, archduchess of Austria (1468-1524) and daughter of Duke Albrecht III of Saxony, was at this time the second wife of Archduke Sigismund of Austria, who, in 1490, handed over the rulership of Tyrol to Maximilian. After Sigismund died, Katharina married Duke Erich of Brunswick, a frequent competitor in Maximilian’s tournaments.

80 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, n. 2899, n. 2907. Original source: Modena, Archivio di Stato, Estero, Dispacci degli ambasciatori della Germania, busta 1.

76

In August 1494 a tournament was held to celebrate Bianca Maria Sforza’s entry into

the Flemish city of Mechlin. This occasion was again recorded in the writings of Jean Molinet,

who described the rich Italian fashions of Bianca Maria and her ladies as being new and novel

to the Flemings. The company received an honourable reception in the city, with which

Molinet stated Maximilian had a good relationship, and tournaments and bonfires took place.

This time, the tournaments were stated to be in the presence of Maximilian, thus seemingly

ruling him out as a participant on this occasion.81 There was also a triumphal march of the new

royal couple through the streets of the city.82

These tournaments continued during Maximilian’s residence in the city. On 8

September 1494 there is a description by the German humanist Georg Spalatin (a pseudonym

for Georg Burkhardt, 1484-1545) of a tournament, executed in a very casual-sounding way,

taking place in the market square. There Maximilian and some of his knights held a

tournament in the welsch style in their Drabharnisch, or field armour.83 Maximilian, it is perhaps

little surprise to hear, did the best.84

Later that month, a tournament on a grand scale was held in Mechlin to celebrate the

wedding of Wolfgang von Polheim to Johanna von Borsselen of the Netherlands on 18

81 Molinet, Chroniques, vol. 2, Et, à sa trés noble advenue, furent faites joustes, esbatemens et fues de joye, en presence du roy, son mary, de monseigneur l’archiduc son filz, et pluseurs chevaliers estranges, p. 394.

82 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 1 n. 3097; Molinet, Chroniques, vol. II, pp. 393-95. 83 Welsch was a term for non-German speaking people and a designator of a very specific type of

joust, as will be explained in Chapter 3. 84 Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, p. 230. Am Freitag nach Nativitatis Marie ist der König

wie der gein Mecheln kommen, hat von viel Kürissern und andern einen schönen gerüsten Zeug und köstlichen Jnzog gehabt. Sind alle in einer Ordnung und Geschick um den Markt gezogen. Da hat sein kö. Mt. mit etlichen den seinen im Drabharnisch auf welisch gestochen. Das hat wol anderthalb Stund gewähret, bis sie die Rächt abtreib. Der König that das Best.

77

September 1494.85 Alongside Anthony von Yfan, Wolfgang von Polheim was one of the most

prominent tournament participants in Maximilian’s court, and he appears in multiple sources.

Given this context, it is little surprise that a large tournament should have featured

heavily in the celebrations of von Polheim’s marriage. Indeed, weddings feature prominently in

Maximilian’s circle as one of the most common reasons for holding a tournament. The

festivities were chronicled in detail in Das Leben and die Zeitgeschichte Friedrichs des Weisen, by

Georg Spalatin. Spalatin recorded this multi-day tournament in fascinating detail.

On the first day, the day of the wedding itself, he stated that those knights in

attendance jousted in the presence of Maximilian, along with his son from his first marriage,

Philip the Fair, and his new wife, Bianca Maria Sforza (again, presumably ruling out Maximilian

as a participant on this occasion).86 The individual combats are each described over the course

of this tournament, making this a particularly valuable narrative record of a tournament. As an

example, the contestants on the first day were as follows:

1. Elector Friedrich III of Saxony and Sebastian von Mistelbach, who are described as

both unhorsed.87

2. Wolfgang von Polheim (the groom) and a man who known simply by the name

‘Raunacher’ also competed.88 They jousted twice, both times missing their opponent. On the

85 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 1 n. 1014. Johanna (c. 1476-1509) was the daughter of the marshal of France, Wolfhart VI of Borsselen, who was a knight of the Order of the Golden Fleece.

86 These jousts are described with the verb phrase gerannt und gestochen; again, making a pointed differentiation between the Rennen and the Gestech.

87 With the verb phrase haben gerannt, which is used predominantly throughout the following descriptions, although haben gereut is sometimes used as well. Sebastian von Mistelbach (1460-1519) came from the Franconian nobility of Mistelbach and was for some time in the service of Duke Otto of Bavaria. In 1494 he took over the function of bailiff of Grimma, in Saxony. He went on to serve Elector Friedrich of Saxony (his opponent in this match), and in 1516 he became a Kurfürstlichen Hofmarschall.

88 Possibly a member of the Austrian family of Kalhamer von Raunach auf Liechtenthan.

78

third try, however, von Polheim overturned both ‘Raunacher’ and his horse – an impressive

blow.

3. Anthony von ‘Lefou’ and Gasper Lamberger in a Rennen in which both fell.89

4. An un-named nobleman of Hainault and Count Hans von Montfort in a Rennen, in

which both fell.

5. Sir Weikhard von Polheim (Wolfgang’s brother) and a nobleman from ‘Orttemberg’

(presumably Württemberg), in which the latter fell.

6. Christoph Schenk von Limpurg and Count Haug von Montfort, in which both fell.

7. Wolf Jorge and Hans von Stein, in which both fell.

8. Hans von Augsburg and Franz Schenck (gestochen is used here) jousted three times;

both fell twice and Schenck alone once.

9. Adam von Freundsberg and man known only as ‘Geuman’ ran a Gestech three times;

Freundsberg fell once, along with his horse, and ‘Geuman’ fell twice.90

Finally, several un-named Walen und Niederländer (‘Walloons and Netherlanders’) ran a

welschgestech over a barrier (Schranken), or tilt. They struck each with hard blows and broke many

spears, according to Spalatin. The eyes and ears of several horses were reportedly injured as

well, as the barrier was too low. Anthony von Yfan was considered to have won the day. He

broke the most lances and had the best Treffen, or encounters.91

The following days are narrated in a similar pattern to this, with the individual

competitors being named, as well as who was the winner (if there was one – a phrase for ‘X

won’ is never actually used, an indicator of who was unhorsed and how many times being used

89 Lefou is certainly an alternative spelling of ‘Yfan’. 90 Probably a member of the noble Austrian Geumann (also known as Geymann) family,

possibly Johann Geumann (ca. 1467-1533). 91 Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, pp. 230-31.

79

instead) of each encounter. Many names of competitors appear more than once. The practice

of referring to certain knights only by a title or place of residence is also common. Other

examples include der Myndorffer (most likely the knight Balthasar Myndorffer of Kunšperk, in

modern Slovenia) and der von Tschernaho (likely Dietrich, Lord of ‘Tschernaho’, or Černá Hora,

in the modern Czech Republic, and one of Maximilian’s stewards).92

One constant throughout Maximilian’s reign was his attendance at the imperial diets,

when all the princes and rulers of the empire came together to enact political reform.93 In

addition, one of the most famous – certainly one of the most well-recorded – tournaments in

which Maximilian was involved took place at the imperial diet, or Reichstag, of Worms over the

period of August-September 1495. Even at these politically charged events, where the

legislation and governance of the empire was debated, Maximilian found reason and occasion

to hold tournaments. Indeed, it was the perfect opportunity to do so, as there, in one place,

were conveniently collected all the greatest nobles of the Empire – many of whom were

Maximilian’s contemporaries and his favoured tournament companions.

Yet this is not to say that Maximilian spent all his time in Worms engaged in play. And

this is what makes these diets particularly interesting when it comes to a study of Maximilian

and his tournaments. They were the pre-eminent political gatherings of their day – a time when

powerful leaders of the empire came together to create laws and discuss current issues. During

the meeting in 1495, Maximilian sought to strengthen his empire. He managed to pass the Law

of the Common Penny; a form of taxation similar to an income tax, in which ‘Princes spiritual

92 This collection of names featured at this wedding celebration and tournament represents some of the most frequent tournament competitors at Maximilian’s court; together, they make up a tournament network, which will be discussed in Chapter 6.

93 For more on the role of imperial diets as an occasion for tournaments, see Chapter 6, Section 6.2c.

80

and temporal, prelates, counts, barons, and communes shall pay more or less according to their

status and condition, as is just’. He also enacted the Perpetual Public Peace; a progressive

attempt to outlaw robbing and feuding within the empire.94

Alongside these political manoeuvrings, indeed in many instances inextricably

intertwined with them, was the pageantry and physical skill of the tournament which

Maximilian so loved. These political gatherings proved a popular time for knights to engage in

physical as well as mental games, and Maximilian frequently held tournaments both as a form

of entertainment at the diet and as a form of escape from the same.

It was at the diet of Worms that Maximilian engaged in what would become one of his

most legendary tournament encounters. While there, Maximilian competed in a series of

combats against the famous Burgundian knight Claude de Vauldrey, chamberlain of

Burgundy.95 De Vauldrey was the son of a great tourneyer, and he himself had taken part in

some of the most famous Burgundian pas d’armes, that favoured format for feats of arms in the

Burgundian court in which one fighter formally challenged one or many others.96 Those in

which Vauldrey was involved included the pas of the Golden Tree in Bruges in 1468, where he

was a challenger to the Great Bastard Anthony of Burgundy, half-brother to Charles the Bold.

In 1470 in Ghent, over the course of eight days, de Vauldrey received sixteen challengers at the

pas of the Wild Lady.97

94 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 2, pp. 217-49.

95 Many alternative spellings are given in various sources of Claude de Vauldrey’s name, i.e. Claude de Barre, Claude de Vaudre, Claudio von Batre, and even Glade de Wadria, but, unless quoting a primary source, I shall use this spelling.

96 De Vauldrey’s father, Anthoine, took place in several famous Burgundian pas d’armes, including acting as a ward at the pas of Charlemagne’s Tree (1443). Eric Bousmar, ‘Jousting at the Court of Burgundy. The “Pas d’armes”: Shifts in Scenario, Location and Recruitment’ in Staging the Court of Burgundy: Proceedings of the Conference ‘The Splendour of Burgundy’, pp. 79-84.

97 Bousmar, ‘Jousting at the Court of Burgundy’, pp. 82-83.

81

The Burgundian was praised by Jean Molinet as ‘highly renowned in arms for the very

noble exploits in war and tournaments, jousts, duels, and passages of arms which he had

done’.98 Ludwig von Eyb in his writings described him as a schön stark man – a ‘fine, strong

man’.99 Indeed, across multiple sources both in French and in German there is a sense of

universal respect for de Vauldrey’s prowess as a knight and his skill in the tournament.

The origins of this encounter between Maximilian and de Vauldrey came on All Saint’s

Day (1 November) of the year before the diet, 1494. Molinet provides us with the most

thorough account. He recorded that de Vauldrey encountered Maximilian in Antwerp, and

there he, the Burgundian knight, sent a herald to the emperor (or king of the Romans, as he

was still most commonly referred to) with a formal request to be allowed the privilege of

competing against him. The two exchanged letters, carried on de Vauldrey’s behalf by a herald

and, on Maximilian’s behalf, a clerk of the Order of the Golden Fleece. In true Burgundian

fashion, de Vauldrey sent Maximilian chapitres, or a formal outline of the desired forms of

combat and the rules to be followed.100 This particular chapitre consisted of seven parts in which

the rules and order of the tournament were specifically laid out. De Vauldrey requested a

‘course of the lance’ as well as foot combat with swords. The result of this encounter,

according to the chapitre, would be to attain the honour of being the meilleur chevalier du monde, or

the ‘best knight in the world’.101

98 Molinet, Chroniques, vol 2. p. 399: très renommé en armes par les très nobles exploix de guerre et les tournoix, joustes, champiages et pas d’armes qu’il avoit fait.

99 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, p. 157. 100 This is the only occasion which I have found where chapitres were issued for a contest in

which Maximilian was involved, this being a much more common practice by the French and Burgundians than by the Germans in their tournaments.

101 Molinet, Chroniques, vol. 2. pp. 399-403.

82

This whole decidedly formal approach was a trademark of the Burgundian style of

conducting a tournament, and chapitres were normally issued prior to a pas d’armes. Furthermore,

in Burgundy, tournament spectacle was often taken to an entirely new level, with costumes and

props and role-playing being common, preceded by a formal announcement of the date,

location, and rules of the tournament, as issued in the chapitres. Although Maximilian did not

favour this style of holding tournaments, he would undoubtedly have been familiar with it

through his marriage to his first wife, Mary of Burgundy, and his inheritance of her lands. In

this instance, the older de Vauldrey was bringing Maximilian into this Burgundian tradition; he

was requesting for a tournament to be held on his terms.

De Vauldrey was reportedly fifty years old at this time – an impressively advanced

although not unheard of age for a man to still be competing in tournaments – while

Maximilian was thirty-six, still relatively young. Yet a Venetian legate to Maximilian’s court

wrote that de Vauldrey apparently had a vision that he must fight with the most powerful ruler

in the world in the arena. Indeed, such was his enthusiasm that when Maximilian postponed

the encounter until the summer of 1495 de Vauldrey constantly beset him with messages until

he finally agreed to set a date for the tournament.102

Over the course of the diet at Worms, Maximilian participated in several tournaments

against his fellow German knights. Yet the competition with de Vauldrey was the one which

received by far the most attention. It was eventually set for 31 August, although it ended up

being postponed until 3 September. It was to take place in the town’s central marketplace – the

most common location for tournaments which took place in cities. Maximilian himself

102 Deutsche Reichstagakten unter Maximilian I., vol. 5, p. 1803.

83

announced that he would prepare the field of competition, showing his keen interest in being

personally involved in the preparations.103

On that day, according the writings of Ludwig von Eyb (the existence of whose own

tournament book makes his descriptions the most credible), barriers were erected to enclose

the two fighters.104 Von Eyb built up a wonderful sense of suspense and anticipation as he

described the two men preparing themselves in separate, lavish pavilions which they erected

outside of the newly constructed stands. Noltz wrote that each hung their shield and helmet

outside their separate tents. Both he and von Eyb listed numerous other knights who were in

attendance, the names of which included some of the most prominent German nobles of

Maximilian’s court; his closest allies and frequent participants in his tournaments.105 These men

showed up to this particular contest armed and apparently ready to take part themselves at a

moment’s notice. Next, a herald rode out from the emperor’s tent and demanded that the

audience remain silent; that they not irritate the fighters or shout, wave, or point, but simply let

them fight each other. Anyone who broke this rule, no matter who they were, it was declared,

would have their head struck off without mercy.106

De Vauldrey emerged from his tent first and entered the barriers with his lance resting

across his saddle. Then came Maximilian, also with his lance and wearing his kempfharnisch, his

tournament armour. As soon as the trumpeters sounded their horns the two men strichen sie mit

dem Spieβen zusamen – ‘struck together with their lances’. Both competitors’ lances were broken

– a skilful result – and die helden or ‘the heroes’, as von Eyb called them, took up their swords

103Deutsche Reichstagakten unter Maximilian I., vol. 5, pp. 1803-10. 104 [A]lle mit gülden tüchern und köstlichen tapecerein behangen, von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten

Wilwolts von Schaumburg, pp. 156-57. 105 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, pp. 156-57. Monumenta Wormatensia:

Annalen und Chroniken, pp. 396-97. Noltz also refers to Vauldrey as a Walen, or Walloon. 106 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, p. 157.

84

and continued the combat.107 The two exchanged numerous heroic blows. But here, at last,

Maximilian proved too swift and powerful for his opponent, and the two were separated by

the judges.108

After the central combat between Maximilian and de Vauldrey, von Eyb describes a

mass foot combat which ensued between all the other nobles there present, using, as different

sources name, both swords, knives, and staff weapons. The swords are described as being

sharpened on both sides, so not blunted for a more benign form of tourney.109 As von Eyb

describes the event, it is hard to tell if this was planned, or if it was a spontaneous outbreak of

tournament fervour.110 The whole thing was described by Noltz as schön und lustig […] zu sehen,

or ‘beautiful and joyful […] to see’.111 When things started to get a bit too belligerent, this

combat was broken up as well. After this, the entire group retired to the evening’s banquet and

dancing, at which all hard feelings seem to have been forgotten.112

However Maximilian’s much-publicised competition with de Vauldrey was not the only

occurrence of a tournament at this diet – or, indeed, other diets which Maximilian attended, as

seen later in this chapter. After Maximilian and de Vauldrey’s series of combats, there were

other tournaments in the following days. Maximilian twice fought Elector Friedrich III of

Saxony. This was again followed by the ‘struggles’ of many other lords, which could refer to

individual jousts or group combats.113

107 A suit of armour designed for tournament foot combat, and possibly the very one worn by de Vauldrey in this encounter, may be seen today in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (Inv.-Nr. B 33).

108 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, pp. 157-58. 109 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, p. 157. Monumenta Wormatensia, p.

397. Von Eyb refers to lange breite schwert zu beiden seiten schneident, while Noltz refers to messern und stangen. 110 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, p. 157. 111 Monumenta Wormatensia, p. 397. 112 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, p. 158. 113 Monumenta Wormatiensia, p. 397.

85

The next year, in February 1496, a brief reference may be found to another tournament

or tournaments held in Innsbruck. This was during Fastnacht, the carnival period leading up to

Lent, which often proved a popular time for holding tournaments and other festive events (see

Chapter 6). This tournament is only mentioned elliptically though, through a 23 February letter

of the Tyrolean nobleman Sebastian von Mandach.114

This trend continues with another brief reference to a tournament again held during

the same period in Innsbruck in January of the following year, 1497. The ambassador of the

duke of Ferrara, Pandolfo Collenuccio, wrote about a tournament and masked dance which

happened on 8 January in which Maximilian was involved.115

The next month, February, marked the occasion of yet more Fastnacht tournaments,

which spanned several weeks. The same ambassador, Pandolfo Collenuccio, described

Maximilian jousting on 6 February against Elector Friedrich III of Saxony (whom he also

fought in Worms). This was described in the letter as being fought with lances with blunted

tips (a frezi amolati) – presumably then a form of Gestech. He also wrote that Maximilian went

masked to a dance that evening and that another masked dance or mummerei was taking place

that day.116 Then on 14 February Collenuccio wrote that in recent days Maximilian had met

Sigmund III von Welsperg in a tournament.117 This encounter was interestingly described by

Collenuccio as an un-kingly game, or a game not worthy of a king (giogo veramente non da re).118

114 Regesta Imperii, Österreich, Reich und Europa, RI XIV, 2 n. 6864. Original source: Innsbruck, Tiroler Landesarchiv, Maximiliana-Akten, IVa, fol. 175.

115 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 2 n. 4618. Original source: Modena, Archivio di Stato; Dispacci degli ambasciatori della Germania, busta 1, Pandolfo Collenuccio an Hg Ercole d'Este (1497).

116 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 2 n., 4667. Original source: Modena, Archivio di Stato; Dispacci degli ambasciatori della Germania, busta 1.

117 Sigmund von Welsperg (died c.1503) served Maximilian as chamberlain, councillor, and Oberstfeldhauptmann of Tyrol. He was also Obersthofmeister to Maximilian’s second wife, Bianca Maria Sforza.

118 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 2 n., 4685. Original source: Modena, Archivio di Stato; Dispacci degli ambasciatori della Germania, busta 1.

86

These encounters are also corroborated by additional sources: two separate tournament

books. These are the same two already mentioned above, BSB, Cod.icon. 398 and the

Turnierbuch of Elector Johann of Saxony. In the former, the joust against Friedrich III of

Saxony is named a Rennen, although this would seem to contradict the Italian description of the

joust being run with lances with blunted tips, as the Rennen customarily involved pointed

lances. What it could be, however, is an illustration of yet another, separate encounter between

the two, as they certainly may have competed more than once, even on the same day. The

joust against Sigmund III von Welsperg is also illustrated and is given the label of Schwaiff, a

distinctive variety of the Rennen.119 In the latter, this tournament is documented yet again,

showing Johann of Saxony taking on eight opponents, although, according to these two

manuscripts, the elector and the king of the Romans did not cross lances.120

1497 was also the year of the diet of Freiburg, which lasted roughly from September

1497 to September 1498. The primary purpose of this gathering of German nobles was to

further discuss reforms implemented at the previous diet of Worms. Maximilian, however, was

largely absent from the assembly.121 In a letter from September 1497, the papal legate Leonello

Chieregati wrote to Pope Alexander VI that Maximilian, travelling from Hall (in Austria) to

Freiburg, had left before daybreak for Innsbruck (on 26 September) in order to compete there

in a tournament against Duke Georg of Bavaria.122 In this instance, Chieregati used the more

119 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plates 26-28. 120 Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, plates 57-61, 107, 108, 110. 121 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 2,

pp. 279-301. 122 Georg of Bavaria (1455-1503) was the son of Duke Ludwig der Reiche (‘the rich’) of Bavaria

and Amalie, the daughter of Elector Friedrich II of Saxony. Georg married Hedwig Jagiellon, the daughter of King Kasimir IV of Poland. Although he had no surviving sons, his daughter Elisabeth married Ruprecht of the Palitinate (son of Philip, Count Palatine). Also known as der Reiche (‘the rich’) of the house of Wittelsbach, Georg was the last duke of Bavaria-Landshut. His wedding in 1475 to Hedwig Jagiollon was one of the largest celebrations of the time. Georg was connected to the Habsburg court from early in his life. In 1480 he travelled to Vienna to petition Emperor Fredrick III

87

antiquated term hastilusurus to refer to the tournament.123 Unlike many previous examples, this

tournament seemed to be a casual affair fitted into a rushed schedule. It was but one day, yet

Maximilian went out of his way to travel to Innsbruck to compete against this Bavarian

nobleman. 124

January 1498 provides another interesting example of how a tournament might have

come about in Maximilian’s court. The diary of the Venetian historian Marino Sanuto records

how Maximilian, while resident in Innsbruck, wrote to the Italian knight Gaspare de

Sanseverino (1458-1519) (known colourfully as frachasso, or ‘fracas’) in Milan requesting that

the knight come to him and bring his armour and his horses for jousting (cavalli di giostra), as

the emperor desired to joust with the Italian (whose honorific implies martial prowess).125 This

was followed up by a letter from the Milanese legate Erasmus Brascha, who, writing to Bianca

Maria’s uncle Duke Ludovico Sforza of Milan, stressed again that Maximilian hoped the duke

would soon send Sanseverino to him so that he might joust with him in the Italian style (per

giostara alla italiana).126 Maximilian here demonstrated how he used his influence as Holy Roman

emperor to facilitate his love of jousting. He did not hesitate to summon someone from a

distant court with whom he believed he would enjoy competing and against whom he wished

to test his skill.

for peace with King Matthias Corvinus of Hungary. At one time, he was even the possible inheritor of lands of Duke Sigismund of Tyrol, which eventually fell to Maximilian. Later, he became a strong ally of the emperor and supporter of his campaigns in Swabia, Switzerland, Geldern, and Hungary. There was a possibility of his daughter Elisabeth marrying Maximilian’s son, Philip, although it never came to pass. When he died, a large part of his lands passed to Maximilian and were united with Tyrol.

123 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 2 n. 5322. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS Latini, Classe XIV/Nr 99, coll 4278, fol. 94.

124 This letter shows the ruler going to extra trouble for the joy of the activity, while not partaking in or needing the context of any larger festivities or holidays, a theme which will be explored further in Chapter 6.

125 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol 1, p. 860. 126 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 2, n. 5757. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato;

Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 47 f.

88

Later that January, a brief record of a tournament in Innsbruck which Maximilian

attended may be found in the letters of Erasmus Brascha to the duke of Milan. Brascha wrote

that, in the middle of financial negotiations with Maximilian regarding money owed the

emperor by the Milanese duke, their conversation was interrupted when the emperor was

summoned to watch a tournament in which Elector Johann of Saxony was participating.127

This abrupt disruption gives the appearance of placing the viewing of a tournament high in

Maximilian’s priorities. He was willing to cut off diplomatic discussion for the pleasure of

going to watch the entertainment.128

Most interestingly, by now the Italian knight Gaspare de Sanseverino had arrived to

compete alongside the German nobles and against Maximilian as well, as he had earlier desired,

in the Italian style. The Italian arrived in Innsbruck on 15 February, one day earlier than

expected, in order to watch another tournament scheduled for that day. He was accompanied

by thirty-three other knights. Sanseverino was warmly greeted by the emperor and several of

his knights on the tournament grounds, where the Italian also witnessed a joust between

Andreas von Liechtenstein and a nobleman in the service of an unnamed duke of

Mecklenburg.129

Maximilian organised two separate locations for tournaments to be held on this

occasion – one for the Italian style and one for the German style.130 The tournament to take

127 As mentioned above, Johann of Saxony, clearly a tournament enthusiast, has his own Turnierbuch. He may be the host of this particular tournament, not just one of the participants, as he is described as the ‘possessor’ of it in Brascha’s letter.

128 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 2 n., 5818. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 54 ff.

129 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5881, 5884. Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 143-146 and Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 82 ff.

130 The references to ‘Italian’ and ‘German’ styles most likely denotes a Welschgestech and a Deutschgestech. The reason for the two separate locations may be as one area needed a barrier, or tilt, and one did not. This marked separation of the two forms is a critical development.

89

place between Maximilian and Sanseverino was scheduled for 6 March, after which Maximilian

was meant to at last travel to Freiburg to attend the imperial diet.131 First, on 23 February, the

Italian jousted (with Maximilian’s permission) against his armourer, a man known only as

Zurla, with the goal of breaking four lances in the presence of Maximilian and several of his

nobles. The armourer was subsequently injured in the joust.132

Maximilian himself later sustained an injury to the head which caused a delay and a

necessitated a rescheduling of some of the Italian-style tournaments.133 Before his scheduled

encounter with Sanseverino on 6 March (having seen that the Italian was amply capable in his

previous joust against his armourer), Maximilian fought a visiting Neapolitan ambassador once

in the Italian style, as well as taking part in several other jousts in the German style. On 3

March however, Maximilian injured his foot in a fall from his horse in a joust and, after all his

efforts, never had the chance to compete against Sanseverino. On 4 March, Sanseverino

jousted against the same unnamed Neapolitan ambassador and conducted himself admirably,

although he then had to return to Duke Ludovico in Milan.134 Leonello Chieregati in his letters

also substantiates the constant runnings of these German and Italian jousts in which

Maximilian excelled and stood out. He portrays Maximilian’s foot injury as more serious,

though, and wrote that, after his fall, Maximilian suspended all Italian jousts.135

131 Deutsche Reichstagakten, vol. 5, pp.543-44. 132 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5910. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato;

Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 95 ff. 133 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5934. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale

Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 147 f. 134 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5966. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato;

Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 113 f. 135 Regest Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5983. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale

Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 149.

90

These tournaments again feature in pictorial sources as well written ones. Maximilian’s

joust against Elector Johann of Saxony and Hans von Montfort (described as a Schwaiff) are

illustrated in the Turnierbuch BSB, Cod.icon. 398.136 Maximilian’s joust against Johann of

Saxony, along with one other competition, also appears in the elector’s own Turnierbuch.137 This

instance of the same encounter being illustrated in two separate sources allows for a valuable

comparison of the veracity of both.

Eventually Maximilian was forced to write and explain his delayed arrival in Freiburg.

Maximilian also found time to write to Duke Ludovico Sforza of Milan and thank him for

sending Sanseverino to Innsbruck, even though the two never got to face each other in the

lists.138 More tournaments and jousting, meanwhile, continued in Innsbruck, as recorded by the

papal legate Leonello Chieregati, who complained that such games were impeding Maximilian

and the other nobles’ progress on toward Freiburg.139

The end of the fifteenth century brought other troubles for Maximilian. He engaged in

a war against the Swiss Confederation, a group of territories who wanted independence from

the Holy Roman Empire. Maximilian was eventually forced to grant it with the signing of the

Peace of Basel.140 The French also seized Milan, forcing Maximilian to come to the aid of his

wife Bianca Maria Sforza’s family and embroiling him in a prolonged conflict which became

known as the Italian Wars.141 His reign as Holy Roman emperor was not a smooth one so far.

136 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plates 30-32. 137 Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, plates 111, 112. 138 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5994. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato;

Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 119. 139 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5934. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale

Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 147 f. 140 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 2,

pp. 330-36. 141 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 2,

pp. 358-63.

91

2.5 A New Century and Consolidation of Power

January 1500 again found Maximilian in his beloved Innsbruck. There he received various

Italian and German noblemen, including his wife’s uncle, Duke Ludovico Sforza of Milan, as

well as ambassadors from Spain and Naples. Over the course of one afternoon, c. 19 January, a

tournament was held in Innsbruck, undoubtedly to entertain his guests. It is unclear whether

Maximilian took part, although it is certainly not out of the question.142

A later letter of 26 January to Duke Ludovico Sforza contained the smallest of passing

references to a tournament – not unusual in these sources – which simply stated that ‘after the

tournament’ Maximilian had dinner with the Bishop of Brixen.143 Yet this would seem to refer

to a different occasion and tournament than the one described on the 19th, as in that instance

Maximilian was said to have dined with Duke Ludovico himself, with no mention of the

bishop. So this could well be another tournament of just a day or afternoon, which Maximilian

was certainly either a witness to or participant in.

In March of 1500 Maximilian was attending the imperial diet of Augsburg. During

these meetings the imperial princes attempted to take power away from Maximilian, and more

power was given to the Reichsregiment council.144 Despite (or perhaps because of) this

environment of political unease, numerous instances of jousting and tournaments took place

over the course of this diet involving Maximilian and other knights. Some examples of this are

as follows: On 22 March Maximilian left Augsburg and rode to Munich to hold a tournament

142 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 3, 1 n. 9722, n. 9723. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 587.

143 Prince-Bishop Melchior von Meckau (1440-1509). 144 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 3,

pp. 301-05, 401.

92

and to also go hunting, returning to Augsburg on the 26th. Thomas Krull, a dean of

Brandenburg, writing to Elector Joachim I of Brandenburg, described how when he, Krull,

arrived in Augsburg, Maximilian was not there, as he had undertaken the aforementioned

journey to Munich, accompanied by Duke Georg of Bavaria, among others, and eighty horses.

They were all reportedly dressed in their Turnierkleidung, or ‘tournament clothing’. In Munich

the nobles apparently gerent und gestochen in the welsche style.145

Again, here is an example of Maximilian using the imperial diet as an opportunity to

engage in tournament sport with the other knights and nobleman who had also gathered there.

Yet at the same time he was not fully committed to his political duties; he chose the pleasure

of the joust over giving his full attention to the diet. Krull seemed to be expecting to meet

Maximilian in Augsburg, yet he found the emperor to be absent, as anticipated; rather,

Maximilian had escaped to Munich temporarily and had taken his companions with him. This

could be Maximilian shirking his political duties, or it could also be a statement – a way for

Maximilian to pointedly place himself above the other attendees by choosing when he wished

to come and go from the diet.146

As the diet continued, Maximilian persisted in finding ways to involve tournaments in

the proceedings. Wilhelm Peuscher, a canon of Augsburg, in a letter written in July 1500, gave

the impression that little was being accomplished by Maximilian and the other nobles and

princes at the diet. He mused that it was difficult to tell what had truly been achieved as those

145 As mentioned above, welsch appears to be interchangeable with italianisch in many of the sources. It is also of interest that both basic categories – gerent and gestochen – of joust are conducted in this Italian style.

146 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 3, 1 n. 10022, n. 10036. Original source: Merseburg, Deutsches Zentralarchiv; Geheimes Staatsarchiv, Repositur X, Nummer ZY (Planetenzeichen), Faszikel 2 K, fol. 12 f.; Vienna, Hofkammerarchiv, Gedenkbücher 7, fol. 72=70; fol. 72v f.=70v f.; fol. 73v f.=71v f.

93

present devoted so much of their time to their customary tournaments and other festivities. In

this militari ludo (‘military game’), as he termed it, the knights mutually bloody each other’s ears

and heads with their ‘noisy’ lances.147

Die Chroniken der schwäbischen Städte for the city of Augsburg also contains descriptions

of Maximilian and his knights passing their time in friendly competition. On 6 July, Maximilian

jousted with his favoured tournament companion Friedrich III of Saxony, among others, in

the town’s wine market.148

The tournaments in Augsburg continued into the next month of August. However, on

this occasion there was a ceremonial circumstance providing a legitimate reason for such an

event. This was the investiture of the above-mentioned Joachim I as elector of Brandenburg,

on 12 August. After a lengthy description of the elaborate ceremony, during which Maximilian

apparently wore the robes of Charlemagne, a tournament was held while the queen, Bianca

Maria Sforza, was described as watching with her women. Unfortunately, after a lengthy

description of which nobles performed which roles in the ceremony and what robes they wore,

there is only a brief reference at the end to the jousting itself.149 In his diary on 15 August,

Marino Sanuto wrote that Maximilian was organising tournaments and festivities, and that he

was personally involved in the joust (e il re à corsso).150

147 De rebus autem per Regiam Maiestatem, principes ac nobiles, quorum magna copia est in hic dieta sive synodo, actis conclusisve nihil dicere certo scio; necdum eorum, quae nunc conclusa, quempiam scire existimo, qui consilio regni interfuisse perhibentur. Reliquum est, ut principes ac nobiles militari ludo ac aliis triumphis suo more incumbentes crebrius hastarum, lancearum et armorum congressu ac strepitibus sibi mutuo, ut fit, et caput et aures obtundunt et corpus quoque feriunt, Der Briefwechsel des Conrad Celtis, p. 445.

148 Die Chroniken der deutschen Städte, vol. 4, p. 89. 149 Die Chroniken der deutschen Städte, vol. 4, pp. 90-92: Darnach hat man angefangen zu rennen und

stechen, p. 92. 150 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 3, p. 638.

94

Maximilian continued to use tournaments to convey a sense of prosperity in his court.

The beginning of 1502 marked another instance where tournaments accompanied a ceremonial

occasion: the marriage of Balthasar Wolf von Wolfsthal, Maximilian’s Hofkammermeister in

Innsbruck. This wedding coincided with the traditionally tournament-filled carnival period of

Fastnacht, which made for a lengthy period of numerous jousts at Maximilian’s Innsbruck

court. The Venetian ambassador Zaccaria Contarini described how, beginning 12 January and

lasting throughout the carnival period, many tournaments in the German and Italian styles

were held.151 Maximilian reportedly fought against his own steward (unnamed), in an

unspecified style of joust. There were also banquets and balls held in the evenings,

unsurprisingly. Maximilian was so wrapped up in these tournaments, in fact, that he sent

substitutes to meetings with Contarini, as he was distracted by his knightly games.152

Again Maximilian is portrayed as unmindful of ongoing political negotiations, because

he was focused on his tournaments He was even unable to meet with people because he was

participating in jousts or attending parties. While he was seemingly sometimes able to balance

his love of tournaments with his political duties, especially when combining the two, there are

numerous other instances where Maximilian appears to have shirked his ruling responsibilities

for the enjoyment and escapism of athletic competition.

Marino Sanuto substantiated this in his writing on 24 January. He described Maximilian

jousting in the Italian style (a la Italiana) against Count Wolfgang of Fürstenberg, during which

time they fought with sharpened weapons (making it, in all likelihood, a Welschrennen). That

151 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 4, 1, n. 15899. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 122 f.

152 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 15936. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 124v ff.

95

evening, there was music and dancing, and the same schedule was then repeated on the 26

January.153

But at the same time, while they often appear to be a distraction, these jousts also often

acted as a useful setting for political negotiations and discussions. On 29 January Contarini

wrote that the Spanish ambassador to the court (a man named Juan Manuel) took part in a

tournament (spettaculo de questi astiludij) which Maximilian organised. Perhaps this was at the

ambassador’s request, as a chance for him to show off his skill to the emperor. Or perhaps

Maximilian wished him to take part in a joust in a German court, as a hopefully impressive

representation of his courtly culture. At this same tournament Maximilian seized the chance to

discuss the possible crusade against the Turks with Contarini (who finally obtained his meeting

with the elusive emperor – in the setting of the very thing which had thwarted meetings

previously).154 As often as tournaments kept Maximilian from attending to his political duties,

they also helped him to accomplish them as a means to an end.

Still within this Fastnacht period, in February 1502, Maximilian travelled the short

distance from Innsbruck to Hall, where he had arranged for another tournament to be held,

according to Contarini. On 4 February Contarini wrote that Maximilian was about to depart

the city and should be gone for three days. It was also implied that Maximilian would be

meeting with French, Burgundian, and Spanish ambassadors while away, casting this as yet

another tournament arranged as a convenient setting for political dialogue.155

153 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 216. 154 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 15976. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca

Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 131 ff. 155 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 16016. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca

Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 137v ff.

96

Marino Sanuto also kept an account of this tournament, although he described the

events as happening on 3 February (unless, as is very possible, Maximilian travelled to Hall to

watch a tournament on both days). A joust was again held in the Italian style, which appears to

be highly favoured by Maximilian around this time. There were eight men competing in this

tournament, including, Sanuto pointed out, Maximilian himself (et con questi era la cesarea majestà),

and it lasted for one and a half hours. This must be a description of a tourney as the

description of eight competitors implies a group rather than individual confrontations, and a

specific time length is given. After dinner, at which the Spanish and Burgundian, although not

the Venetian, ambassadors were present, the dancing commenced.156

This tournament in Hall also provides another example of some of the hazards these

events could present, and not just to the participants. On this occasion, a wooden scaffolding

serving as temporary stands for the spectators collapsed. No one was killed, although many

suffered broken limbs.157

Upon Maximilian’s return to Innsbruck that February another tournament was held on

the thirteenth in the town square in front of the famous Goldenes Dachl (‘Golden Roof’),

completed in 1500 in honour of Maximilian’s marriage to Bianca Maria Sforza. Invited to

attend was the French ambassador Charles Geoffroy.158 For the occasion the town square was

temporarily covered over with planks of wood and strewn with sand, necessary technical

preparations for a tournament. A temporary stand was also erected for the judges, who

included, among others, an unnamed Burgundian nobleman and the herald of the king of

France. Maximilian appeared on a handsome white horse accompanied by eight fellow

156 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 217. 157 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 217. 158 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 16055. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca

Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 144v f..

97

combatants, each armed and with lances and bards in the Italian style. The emperor was

wearing a siren for a crest. These men were followed by a magnificent parade of squires, each

bearing coats of arms of the various foreign fighters. Entering the lists to the sound of

trumpets, this group was presented to the judges. These mounted nobles present are described

as monitoring the combat, which included a Scharfrennen, as well as a fight with swords (it is not

specified whether this was on horseback or on foot) and a ‘mass fight’ which would most likely

mean a tourney on horseback. They fought simply until they were tired. There was a dance

afterward, which lasted until midnight.159

Just a week later, on 20 February, Maximilian invited the French ambassador for dinner

at Schloss Ambras, outside Innsbruck. Afterward a tournament was organised by Maximilian in

the ambassador’s honour at the castle, although no detail is given on who took part. That same

evening, they returned to Hall.160

In November of 1502 Maximilian travelled from Augsburg to the Bavarian city of

Mindelheim to meet with his wife, Bianca Maria. Several days of tournaments and festivities

were planned in the couple’s honour, which Maximilian would no doubt have attended with

pleasure, if not, despite the progression of time, taken part in himself. 161 Marino Sanuto noted

that wooden barriers (stechade) were built for the purpose of the tournaments; wooden barriers,

or tilts, were a trademark of the welsch style of jousting.162

The next year, 1503, feasts and tournaments were held at the beginning of October in

Innsbruck. These appear to centre on the celebration of the marriage of Count Julian of

159 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, pp. 217-18. 160 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 16094. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca

Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 148 ff. 161 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 17084. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca

Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 279v ff. 162 E si fa stechade; si dice per far zostre, Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, pp. 508-09.

98

Lodron (1475-1519) and Apollonia Lang (1480-?).163 They also marked an occasion upon

which Maximilian was reunited with his son by Mary of Burgundy, Philip the Fair. Anthoine de

Lalaing, a Hainault nobleman and chamberlain to Philip the Fair, wrote that on the first of the

month Maximilian and his son heard mass in the Innsbruck Hauptkirche – both splendidly

dressed – and afterward met a group of German noblemen in front of the Hofburg to hold a

tournament in the German style (à la mode d Allemaigne). Various types of weapons were used in

this affair, including lances and daggers.164 That day and the next, Marino Sanuto wrote, more

tournaments were held.165 After dinner on the first there was also reportedly dancing in the

French and Swiss styles. On 2 October the marriage itself took place, and, after the wedding

dinner and four hours of dancing, more jousts were conducted among the grands maistres et

gentilshomes de la maison du roy which were à la mode d'Allemaigne.166

In 1504, on 31 January, a brief reference to a tournament was included in a letter of

Francesco Peschiera to Marquis Francesco Gonzaga of Mantua. On this occasion Maximilian

met with his sister, Kunigunde, and her husband, Duke Albrecht IV of Bavaria, in Augsburg,

as well as with two Spanish and one Venetian ambassadors.167 After the customary festal

tournament there was dancing, during which Maximilian reportedly danced with ‘the most

163 Apollonia was the sister of Matthias Lang, archbishop of Salzburg. 164 Collection des voyages des souverains des Pays-Bas, ed. by Louis Prosper Gachard (Brussels: F. Hayez,

1876), p. 319: ‘A l'après-disner aulcuns gentilshomes allemans de la maison du roy se trouvèrent sur la place devant le roy, la royne et Monsigneur et aultres grands maistres, pour courre à la jouste à la mode d Allemaigne. Aulcinis courrurent à rocet, aultres à fers esmoulus; et les lances estoient si grosses que nulles ne rompirent, mais à chescun cop s'entre-abatoient de leurs chevauls jus à la terre.’

165 E tut oil dì é stà fato feste e zostre. Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 5, p. 152. 166 Collection des voyages des souverains des Pays-Bas, pp. 322-23. 167 Duke Albrecht IV of Bavaria (1447-1508) (also count palatine of the Rhine) was married to

Kunigunde, Maximilian’s sister, and was the father of Duke Wilhelm IV, duke of Bavaria, who produced his own Turnierbuch. Known as der Weise (‘the wise’), Albrecht married Kunigunde without her father, Emperor Fredrick III’s consent, after illegally seizing control of several imperial fiefs. War was prevented through mediation by Maximilian, and many of Albrecht’s territorial acquisitions were later returned to the emperor.

99

important women of the city’.168 The German author Hans Ungelter (1487-1536) described

Maximilian partaking in a Welschgestech as well as a combat on foot before the ladies of the

court, followed by a costly mummerei.169 This occasion marks the continuing tradition of the

Fastnacht tournaments. On 10 February the Venetian ambassador Alvise Mocenigo was singled

out by Maximilian to attend a festival at which the emperor jousted with Ruprecht, count

palatine of the Rhine (1481-1504).170

On 17 February Hans Ungelter once again described how Maximilian jousted and

danced and held expensive banquets in the welsch style.171 On 26 February Marino Sanuto

reported how the Venetian ambassador Alvise Mocenigo lamented that the emperor was

continually occupied with festivals and tournaments (Come il re è stato continue [his emphasis] in

feste e in zostre.).172 The implied disapproval here seems to say that Maximilian’s time might have

been better invested elsewhere, and that he was not accomplishing as much as he should be.

In 1508 Maximilian’s long-time claim to the title of Holy Roman emperor was

validated when he was crowned emperor elect with the consent of Pope Julius II. However, he

was never in fact to officially become emperor, as he was prevented from travelling to Rome,

where the imperial coronation was traditionally held, by his conflicts with the Venetians. With

the Venetians blocking his path, Maximilian had to be satisfied with a symbolic coronation in

Trent.173

168 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 18184. Original source: Mantua, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Gonzaga, 3: Cargeggio di inviati e diversi (E/IV/3), busta 522, Nr 90.

169 Urkunden zur Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bundes (1488-1533), vol. 1, p. 497. 170 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 5, p. 883. ‘Count palatine’ (Pfalzgraf in German) was a non-hereditary

noble title derived from the Latin comes (‘count’) and palatium (‘palace’). 171 Urkunden zur Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bundes (1488-1533), vol. 1, p. 498. Maximilian is frülich

und rent und sticht und tanzt und hat köstlich welsch tentz und bancket. 172 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 5, p. 953. 173 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 4,

pp. 6-15. Also in 1508, Maximilian had entered the League of Cambrai with France, Spain, and the

100

Maximilian’s career continued its often uneven path at the imperial diet of Augsburg in

1510. His proposed plans for the permanent maintenance of 50,000 infantrymen and 10,000

cavalry was not accepted. A few courtly festivities were held at this diet, including a large

tournament held by Maximilian and Elector Friederich III of Saxony, but few people

reportedly attended, which must have been a blow to the emperor.174

Some final descriptions of tournaments appear during the Fastnacht period of 1511,

when Maximilian was in his fifty-second year. Yet he was still holding tournaments at this time,

again in the city of Augsburg. And he may have still been participating, as incredible as it is. In

one of the artist Hans Burgkmair’s tournament prints, there is an image of Maximilian running

a Welschestech over a tilt against Count Palatine of the Rhine Friedrich II (1482-1556) with the

caption: Im 1511 Jarr Ranntten zum augspurg an der herren fassnacht über das dill auff dem weinmarckt,

dise hernach benanttenn herrenn wie hie umb verzaichnnet ist.175 If this was indeed the case, then

Maximilian was still competing in tournaments at an unusually advanced age.

This exceptionality is compounded by Maximilian’s status as one of the pre-eminent

rulers of Europe. In such a position, one would not expect him to be putting himself at risk at

this age. Although, as seen above, Claude de Vauldrey was fifty at the time of his famed

tournament with Maximilian at the diet of Worms in 1495, in which context he would have

been an aged knight facing a much younger man; so such events were not unprecedented.

And, indeed, it would be of little surprise for Maximilian to still be holding tournaments over

this carnival period, as their importance in his political and personal life has been clearly

pope in the hopes of partitioning the Republic of Venice. Maximilian, however, was unable to provide sufficient funds and troops to the league.

174 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 4, pp. 264-69; Wiesflecker, Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches, p. 275.

175 von Hefner, ed., Hans Burgkmaiers Turnier-Buch, plates 25-26. ‘In 1511, in Augsburg, at Fastnacht, these hereafter named lords as are here recorded jousted over the tilt in the wine market.’

101

established. And it would certainly not be out of the question for him to yet desire to prove his

athletic skill and to fight for as long as possible to take part in an activity which had given him

so much pleasure throughout his life.

Another tournament which took place during this same Fastnacht period of 1511 was

held in Heidelberg. This is again documented in the Turnierbuch BSB, Cod.icon 398, which had

previously featured Maximilian most frequently as a competitor.176 The occasion for this

tournament was the wedding of Count Palatine Ludwig V (1478-1544) to Sibille (1489-1519),

daughter of Duke Albrecht IV of Bavaria and Maximilian’s niece, on 23 February. Maximilian

is not depicted as competing in this particular tournament, but its inclusion alongside the other

tournaments featured in this manuscript implies his attendance, if not his participation.

Maximilian, as shown throughout this chapter, frequently attended the weddings of the most

prominent nobles of his empire, and the close family connection enhances this likelihood. The

fact that he is not illustrated as competing would seem to lend doubt to the idea that he did, as

the manuscript in depicting other events always makes a point of illustrating Maximilian.

However, as he apparently was competing in tournaments in Augsburg during this same time,

it is not out of the question that he did on this occasion as well.

In the final years of his life Maximilian turned his attention to guaranteeing his

grandson Charles’ (the future Holy Roman Emperor Charles V) ascension to the imperial

throne upon his death. With the financial aid of the wealthy German banking family the

Fuggers Maximilian attempted to use monetary enticements to persuade the other princes to

176 Munich, BSB, plate 59: Disr nachbeschriben Rennen unnd Stechen seind geschehen zue Eeren dem hochgebornnen fursten und Herren herren Ludwig Ffalzgraf bey Rhein und der hochloblichen Edlen furstin aus Bairen seinem geliebten gemahel unnd Braut zue Haidelberg in dem Tausent funffhundert unnd ailfsten Jar wie hernach folgt (‘These Rennen and Stechen described hereafter were done to honour the highborn prince and lord, the lord Ludwig, Palatine of the Rhine, and the highly laudable, noble princess of Bavaria, his beloved wife and bride at Heidelberg in the year 1511, as hereafter follows’).

102

select his grandson. His efforts left a legacy of Habsburg debt and yet more evidence of

Maximilian’s chronic mismanagement of money, but Charles did indeed become Holy Roman

emperor.177

Maximilian died in Wels, Austria, in 1519. Extravagent in everything he did, Maximilian

dictated that after his death he wished for his teeth to be knocked out and his head shaved to

show piety and penance. This humbling of his corporal form, however, had not prevented

Maximilian from planning an elaborate tomb for himself in his favourite city, Innsbruck. It was

not completed in time, and Maximilian instead rests permanently in a more modest grave in

Wiener Neustadt.178

2.6 Conclusions

Through these examples we may follow in the footsteps of Maximilian, tracing a lifetime of

tournaments, and in doing so we witness the illustrious career of a skilled athlete emerge,

alongside his path as a great ruler. There are some critical trends and patterns which begin to

emerge from a study of these tournaments. Notably, we may see that the height of

Maximilian’s tournament career came in the 1490s, when the young monarch was transitioning

from king of the Romans to the responsibility of being Holy Roman emperor and was

attempting to assert his authority over his domains. We may also see a trend in locations.

Although ruler of a vast domain and almost always on the move, Maximilian had his favourite

cities in which to base his highly mobile court during certain times, notably Fastnacht season.

177 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 4, pp. 404-15.

178 Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: Das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 4, pp. 420-38. Maximilian’s tomb in Innsbruck was eventually completed, and it stands today as a monument to the emperor and the grand scale of his imagination.

103

These were also his favoured cities in which to hold tournaments, and this is where Innsbruck

and Augsburg in particular stand out. The corresponding locations of his most famous

armouries likely have something to do with this. There are also certain settings which present

themselves as concurrent with tournaments. Weddings and other celebratory events are

notable among these. Although political occasions such as the diets are no less utilised. These

grander settings are a separate category from the more casual, intimate competitions which

Maximilian appeared to often organise at a moment’s notice.179

This connects to the idea of what makes these tournaments uniquely German and the

ways in which these sources display that. Their often casual nature, with little formality (or as

little as may be connected with an event involving the Holy Roman emperor), is a defining

feature of this. There were never any Burgundian-style chapitres issued in a German context.

This is a far more Burgundian trait of tournament organisation, and the one time it plays a role

is in the Burgundian nobleman Claude de Vauldrey’s highly formal request to compete with

Maximilian. Otherwise, as is evident across these sources, the Maximilian tournaments usually

involved the same core group of participants – mostly high ranking German nobles and

princes from across his empire. These are the men who travelled with Maximilian’s mobile

court, or were never far away, and were at his call at all times to throw together a tournament.

It is these men, with Maximilian at their head, who helped to create a unique German

tournament culture.

Within the sources, unsurprisingly, there are different perspectives and different

elements emphasised based on who was recording the events. The Italian, German, French,

and Burgundian sources all focus on different aspects of the tournament and the events

179 More on significance of these times, locations, and occasions will be discussed in Chapter 6.

104

surrounding it. The Italian and the French, to speak in broad terms, were more likely to

provide descriptions of the clothing or of the evening’s dances, while the German sources

often give more detail of the combats themselves. And this is not yet factoring in the

illustrated sources, whose pictorial representations obviously present a whole different form of

analysis. And, of course, once again we are faced with the difficulty of defining ‘tournament’

across these sources, a word which has a plethora of counterparts in other languages and

which is presented as a highly malleable concept. It appears that Maximilian and his

contemporaries were not restricted by any self-imposed definition of the word, and felt free to

hold tournaments of all sizes and lengths and levels without adhering to a certain idea.

Date Location Occasion Maximilian’s Role

December-April

1485-86 Cologne/Frankfurt

Maximilian’s

coronation as King of

the Romans

Participant

November-January

1489-90 Linz

Event co-hosted by

Frederick III and King

Matthias Corvinus of

Hungary

Participant

June 1491 Nuremberg Recreation Participant

1492 Innsbruck Recreation Participant

January 1494 Innsbruck For the honour of

Bianca Maria Sforza Unknown

August 1494 Mechlin Bianca Maria Sforza’s

arrival Spectator

September 1494 Mechlin Recreation Participant

September 1494 Mechlin Wedding of Wolfgang

von Polheim Spectator

August-September

1495 Worms Diet of Worms Participant

105

February 1496 Innsbruck Fastnacht Unknown

January 1497 Innsbruck Fastnacht Unknown

February 1497 Innsbruck Fastnacht Participant

September 1497 Innsbruck Recreation Participant

January 1498 Innsbruck Recreation Spectator

February-March

1498 Innsbruck Fastnacht Participant

January 1500 Innsbruck Diplomatic relations Unknown

January 1500 Innsbruck Fastnacht Unknown

March-July 1500 Augsburg Diet of Augsburg Participant

August 1500 Augsburg Investiture of Joachim

I of Brandenburg Participant

January 1502 Innsbruck Wedding of Balthasar

Wolf von Wolfsthal Unknown

January-February

1502 Innsbruck Fastnacht Participant

February 1502 Hall in Tyrol Fastnacht Unknown

November 1502 Mindelheim Recreation Unknown

October 1503 Innsbruck Wedding of Count

Julian of Lodron Unknown

January 1504 Augsburg Diplomatic relations Unknown

February 1504 Augsburg Fastnacht Participant

February 1511 Augsburg Fastnacht Participant

February 1511 Heidelberg Wedding of Count

Palatine Ludwig V Unknown

Table 2: Maximilian’s Tournaments Chronology180

180 This table represents the various periods over which Maximilian held tournaments, where the primary sources have provided substantial evidence or description of such. Within each of these spans of time, multiple encounters of mounted joust, tourney, or foot combat have taken place. This table is meant to provide a picture of the broad time periods over which Maximilian was involved in some way in a tournament or series of tournaments.

106

Chapter 3: The Language of the Tournament and Varieties of the Joust

3.1 Introduction

By the time of Maximilian’s birth in 1459, the tournament had long been a popular pastime in

princely courts across Europe, enjoying rises and dips in popularity (thanks in part to frequent

censure by the Church), changes in form and function, and a widening of geographically

related variances. During Maximilian’s lifetime, and thanks in no small part to his influence, the

German tournament was to become a unique entity, with its own distinctive characteristics.

For, while it was already set apart from its European counterparts in many ways, it is the

German tournament as preserved through the efforts of Maximilian that modern scholars are

most familiar with and which has served as the foundation on which studies of the subject

have been built. His influence on creating the image of the medieval German tournament as it

is known today cannot be overstated. One of the ways in which Maximilian accomplished this

feat will be explored in this chapter through an analysis of the language and categorisation

involved.

This chapter will examine two subjects central to the German tournament under

Maximilian. While looking at the styles of tournament combat (specifically, in this instance, the

joust) practiced or promoted by Maximilian, a study of the language involved will also be

undertaken.1 It will focus on the defining elements of the German tournament in Maximilian’s

time, specifically those involved in the Rennen and the Gestech (discussed below), their key traits

and characteristics. Along with this must come an analysis of their etymology and the language

1 This chapter will focus solely on the joust (both as an individual and group competition). As previously mentioned in the Introduction, while Maximilian often included various forms of foot combat in his tournaments, these other numerous forms of combat are outside the scope of this chapter and thesis.

107

used to describe medieval tournaments in German-speaking regions, as well as some of the

difficulties which must be considered by modern scholars when dealing with ENHG

tournament terminology and translation. This necessary analysis will make up the first part of

this chapter. Using these headings of Gestech and Rennen, this chapter will then turn to an in-

depth study of the explicitly named styles of mounted joust representative of Maximilian’s

court, either in reality or in literary form only. This will be done using primary sources which

demonstrate the evolution of these styles of joust, as well as pointing to some of their real-life

occurances. It will also be supplemented with purely representational images, such as those

found in Maximilian’s Triumphzug, as examples of the idealised presentation of the final forms,

real or imagined, of Maximilian’s sponsored jousting styles.

3.2 Tournament Terminology and the Difficulties of Translation

Terminology is a sticking point which troubles the study of tournaments as a whole, no matter

on what region or period the focus lies. Defining the various elements of the tournament is

challenging, as they often changed in meaning over time and as new words were developed –

in multiple languages – to describe new objects or events even as they were still taking shape,

and a certain amount of cross-linguistic exchange took place as well. Different modern

scholars, such as Joachim Bumke, Juliet Vale, and Noel Fallows, among others, have touched

upon this subject, delving into it to varying degrees. However, in the context of this research, it

deserves a brief examination and explanation, for, as Juliet Vale has rightly pointed out,

‘Terminology is fluid and variable; evidence often scrappy and sporadic, from different periods

108

and contexts. Inference and hypothesis inevitably have a contentious role.’2 It is important to

keep this in mind when examining the language of tournaments under Maximilian.

This language had evolved to a more varied and elevated place by Maximilian’s day,

allowing for a greater in-depth description of the events of the tournament using a wide

ranging vocabulary (the most basic level of which can be seen in the distinction between

Gestech and Rennen).3 In older German sources, the beginnings of this tournament-specific

language may be seen to be much more basic. In Wolfram von Eschenbach’s thirteenth-

century romance Parzival, for example, which features several instances of tournaments, the

Middle High German (MHG) noun turnei appears to describe the event of a tournament itself,

along with the accompanying verb turnieren. A more common phrase which appears, though, to

describe the action of taking part in a mounted competition with lances, is tjoste or tjostieren.4

Another example may be found in Ulrich von Liechtenstein’s supposedly autobiographical

thirteenth-century work Frauendienst, which focuses extensively on the hero’s exploits in

tournaments and where similar language is used. Tyostiren and tyost are often used in Frauendienst

to describe the act of jousting.5 The phonetic similarity to the English word joust is clearly

evident, although, at this time, both MHG and English were borrowing heavily from French

chivalrous terminology to describe the world of tournaments as it existed in the twelfth and

thirteenth centuries, lifting and adapting words such as joute (noun), jouter (verb) and tournoi.

2 Juliet Vale, ‘Violence and the Tournament’ in Violence in Medieval Society, ed. by Richard Kaueper (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2000), p. 145.

3 For a basic discussion of the earliest German tournament terminology and its evolution, see Joachim Bumke, Courtly Culture: Literature and Society in the High Middle Ages, trans. by Thomas Dunlap (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), pp. 247-64. Bumke touches on German’s early borrowing from both English and French vocabulary to describe the tournament.

4 Wolfram von Eschenbach, Parzival, ed. by Joachim Bumke (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 2008). Examples include 2880, 2871, 14815, and 14836.

5 Ulrich von Liechtenstein, Frauendienst, ed. by Franz Viktor Spechtler (Göppingen, 2003). Ulrich’s tournament in Friesach (177.1-315.8) offers numerous instances of tournament terminology. The ‘j’ and the ‘y’ are often interchangeable in Middle High German.

109

Over time, and moving into the ENHG-speaking world of the fifteenth century, the

German language would develop its own complex vocabulary with which to talk about

tournaments. Out of this developed the German-specific concept of the Gestech and the Rennen.

Due to the distinctly different set of rules and styles of armour utilised by each of these two

separate styles of joust, they have often been labelled by modern scholars as ‘jousts of war’ (the

Rennen) and ‘jousts of peace’ (the Gestech) (see below). These terms have frequently been

incorrectly applied, largely because of the difficulties faced by scholars when writing about a

uniquely German phenomenon in English, another complex problem which must be

furtherconsidered.

While much of modern scholarship on tournaments of this time has tended to stop at

this basic distinction of Rennen and Gestech without delving into deeper analysis, these are in fact

quite broad terms which have a good deal of flexibility within them. They should really be seen

as category headings, which may be further divided into a fantastic array of different styles of

joust. Indeed, this is how they would have been understood in Maximilian’s day. It is certainly

how he depicted them in the fictional tournaments of his Triumphzug, a distinction which is

further reinforced by various primary sources describing actual tournaments. For within these

two broad categories of Rennen and Gestech exist several specific sub-varieties of mounted joust,

many of which were practiced and/or commemorated by Maximilian during his lifetime.

3.2.a The Etymology of Gestech and Rennen

Along with any study of medieval German tournaments must come a study of the unique

vocabulary used to describe such events. Such an undertaking is necessary to lend a more

holistic understanding to this research. First, an examination of the roots of the two German

words must be made, in order to a) fully appreciate their context in Maximilian’s world, and b)

110

better understand how they ought to be studied today.6 This is particularly important as the

terms have no direct English translations and must retain their German form when being

discussed in non-German scholarship. Both are nouns formed from German verbs. Gestech

comes from the verb stechen, meaning ‘to stab’, ‘to stick’ or even literally ‘to lance’. Rennen is a

direct verb-to-noun transformation of the verb rennen, ‘to run’ or ‘to race’.

Already some of the implicit meaning behind these words as nouns is evident through

their etymology, and the evolution of both words makes sense given the meaning of their root

verbs. It must also be acknowledged here that there is a grammatical difference in the structure

of these two forms. Gestech could also be rendered as Stechen, making it a noun formed from

the infinitive form of the corresponding verb, as is the case with Rennen, rather than Gestech,

which uses the ‘ge’ prefix to form a noun from the verb. Indeed, some scholars have opted to

use the term Stechen, perhaps from a desire to create a pleasing uniformity and symmetry

between the two closely connected words.7 However, this thesis will retain the form Gestech, as

it is the more commonly utilised in modern scholarship and, most significantly, the form which

most frequently appears in the primary sources describing this style of joust (for examples, see

below).

Additionally, while these two terms – Gestech and Rennen – have no direct English

translation, a possible direct linguistic connection may be seen in the rules of the respective

styles of joust to the English meanings of their root verbs. For example, in the varying forms

6 For a basic German definition and discussion of Gestech and Rennen, see Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm (Leipzig: 1854-1961), vol. 5, col. 4208 and vol. 14, col. 812. (Subsequently DWB.)

7 For example, see Stefan Krause, ‘“They call it royal for good reason”: The Tournaments of the Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance’, in Habsburg Splendour: Masterpieces from Vienna’s Imperial Collections at the Kunshistorisches Museum, ed. by Monica Kurzel-Runtscheiner (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), p. 46.

111

of the Gestech the primary goal of the competition was often to shatter a lance on one’s

opponent. In the Rennen, on the other hand, the objective was most often to unhorse one’s

opponent. Thus verb stechen (‘to stab’), as the root of Gestech, appropriately implies intense or

violent impact of some sort, while the verb rennen (‘to run’) implies speed as the primary focus.

The different emphases of the two verbs may be reflected in the conduct of the two jousts,

which, by Maximilian’s time, had become highly specialised.

3.2.b The Trouble with ‘Joust of War’ and ‘Joust of Peace’

Running parallel – and often intertwining – with the modern academic study of the Rennen and

the Gestech is the study of the so-called ‘joust of war’ and ‘joust of peace’. Often, in fact, these

two sets of terms have become mistakenly correlated. An examination of why they should not

be will now be considered. Scholars have often equated the Rennen with the ‘joust of war’ and

the Gestech with the ‘joust of peace’, using one as a synonym for the other. The ‘joust of war’

has been defined as one using sharp lances, with an objective of more closely simulating real

warfare and thus being more violent or dangerous. The ‘joust of peace’ allegedly employed

blunted lances and armour which was better designed to protect its wearer in the context of a

joust, thus providing more safety.8 The beginnings of this coming-together of the German and

English terms may be seen in Coltman R. Clephan’s 1919 work, The Tournament: Its Periods and

Phases.9 It was later established perhaps most decisively by Barber and Barker in their 1989 all-

8 One of the seeds of this concept and evidence of its perpetuation through translation and transmission is found in Froissart’s Chronicles and his description of the tournament at Saint-Inglevert (1390), where French knights hung a ‘shield of peace’ and a ‘shield of war’ outside their tents which corresponded to a matching style of joust. An exact definition of what ‘peace’ and ‘war’ mean, however, is not offered by Froissart. Jean Froissart, Chronicles, ed. and trans. by Geoffrey Brereton (London: Penguin, 1978).

9 Clephan, The Tournament: Its Periods and Phases, p. 9.

112

encompassing study of tournaments.10 It continues to be perpetuated in modern scholarship by

authors such as Larry Silver in his study of Maximilian’s artistic and literary output, and Helen

Watanabe-O’Kelly in her work devoted to early modern German tournaments.11 It has even

endured up to 2015.12 However, in a study of German tournaments, these English terms have

no place.13

The primary difficulty with describing the Rennen as a ‘joust of war’ and the Gestech as a

‘joust of peace’ is that, obvious though it may seem, these are English and not German terms.

At the most basic level, as seen above, the original German words Rennen and Gestech have no

relevance in their respective translations to the supposedly connected English phrases, and no

German primary source ever utilises a German phrase which could be translated into these

modern English phrases (a further discussion of primary source terminology may be found

below). There is also a certain risk in applying English terms to German words which do not

have a clear modern translation. These words, and their accompanying compound noun

formations in German used to describe their numerous variations (discussed below), ought to

be exclusively studied and written about in their original language. The need to apply an

10 Barber and Barker, Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry and Pageants in the Middle Ages, pp. 34, 158-60. 11 Silver, Marketing Maximilian: The Visual Ideology of a Holy Roman Emperor, p. 149; Helen

Watanabe-O’Kelly, Triumphall Shews: Tournaments at German-speaking Courts in their European Context 1560-1730, p. 33.

12 ‘The Rennen developed out of the joust of war, in which mounted contestants in imitation of real battles fought against one another with pointed lances. The Stechen [Gestech] had its origins in the joust of peace […] and was conducted with blunted lances, or lances having three or four prongs’, Krause, ‘“They call it royal for good reason”: The Tournaments of the Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance’, p. 46.

13 This debate has a French parallel, where jousts described as á plaisance and á oultrance have also been discussed using the English equivalents ‘joust of peace’ and ‘joust of war’, respectively. (See, for example, Keen, Chivalry, p. 86 and 205.) An attempt to refute this and to bring some nuance to these definitions, as this chapter is trying to do with the German lexicon, has been undertaken by Will McLean in ‘Outrance and Plaisance’, Journal of Medieval Military History, 8 (2010), pp. 155-70.

113

English label to them is essentially non-existent when sufficient terminology already exists

which better describes the event.

Most importantly however, ‘joust of war’ and ‘joust of peace’ represent an

oversimplification and reduction of myriad forms of combat into two unrelated terms. They

serve as a generalisation of two German-specific styles of joust (Rennen and Gestech) which

represent broad categories and, critically, which have little to do with the concepts of ‘war’ or

‘peace’. The Rennen in all its varieties may consistently make use of non-coronel tipped lances

and a certain (very general) style of armour, yet it in no way simulates realistic warfare. The

equipment for this joust would be just as useless on the battlefield as that for the Gestech,

which, despite its normal use of coronel tipped lances, is not necessarily more ‘peaceful’ in its

conduct than the Rennen.

Progress is being made on this debate, although it is still far from resolved.14 In a recent

article focused on German jousting armour, the authors described the Rennen and the Gestech in

this way: ‘The two most popular forms were the gestech, the most common form of joust of

peace in Germany, and the rennen a new form of the game that has been misleadingly referred

to as a type of joust of war. The rennen was not a joust of war because the armour it employed

was just as specialised and just as unlike war harness as was armour for the gestech.’15 While still

drawing the false equivalency between the Gestech and the joust of peace, here a clear effort is

made to separate the Rennen from the idea of the joust of war. An awareness of the discord

between these English and German terms must be maintained when examining both

secondary and, as will now be discussed, primary sources.

14 The article by Will McLean, cited above, is a good example of this progress. 15 Alan Williams, David Edge, Tobias Capwell, and Stefanie Tschegg, ‘A Technical Note on the

Armour and Equipment for Jousting,’ in Gladius: Estudios sobre armas antiguas, arte militar y vida cultural en oriente y occidente, 32 (2012), p. 140.

114

3.2.c Primary Source Variation

Finally, a brief discussion of how German tournament terminology appears in and varies

across primary sources must be undertaken. For, even as this lexicon expanded, there still

remained a difficulty in agreeing on terms and descriptive language not only within the

German-speaking realm but across different varieties of sources and authorial voices. There

are several reasons for this which must be kept in mind when examining these sources. One

reason had to do with an absence of communication within the so-called tournament

community or network. This was due in part to both a lack of access to any sort of regularised

lexicon and also to a lack of drive (or necessity) to establish any concrete definitions. Indeed,

as Noel Fallows states, ‘despite the wonders of the printing press, the early writers did not have

easy access to each other’s work, nor did they have a unified technical vocabulary, nor did they

even define much of their own unique terminology’.16 There was not so much active

disagreement on how tournament vocabulary should be defined, as a lack of communication

or interest in creating a cohesive, mutually agreed upon framework. Maximilian, in his

commissioning of works such as the Triumphzug (to be discussed later in this chapter) could be

said to be attempting to create just such a thing – a dictionary of the tournament, in essence –

which would in turn go on to become the lexical basis for other, later works commemorating

the German tournament.

With regard to the works crafted by those familiar with the tournament, Fallows also

points out the difficulties faced by those who first began to write texts solely devoted to the art

of the tournament, and specifically jousting. Unlike military manuals of the time, whose

16 Fallows, Jousting in Medieval and Renaissance Iberia, p. 24. While Fallows is discussing jousting in an Iberian context, his argument may easily be applied to German-speaking areas as well.

115

authors could draw upon classical Roman or Greek texts for the ‘original’ sources of their

military terminology, jousting ‘manuals’ had no such precedent to look to for inspiration and

so often had to make up their own terms, which could be entirely different from what another

author might use. It was these writers’ ‘arduous task […] to create from scratch the discipline-

specific terminology that would define both the practice and study of jousting’.17 For modern

scholars attempting to decipher this language of tournaments, another obstacle arises from the

fact that those writing about tournaments in the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries would most

likely be assuming some sort of inherent knowledge of tournament basics from the reader.

Thus they do not always explicitly describe each and every detail involved, as it was not

considered necessary for the intended audience.

This is clearly exemplified in one of the tournament books relating to Maximilian’s

reign, BSB, Cod.icon 398. From the very beginning, in the earliest tournament featured in the

book, that held in Linz in 1489-90, the ENHG phrase Ritterlich spil, or ‘knightly games’, is used

as a descriptor.18 This is a phrase which appears frequently in reference to Maximilian-era

tournaments. While the actual word ‘tournament’ is never used, this alternative expression

neatly encompasses the idea that the activity is limited to a certain class of participant, and is

thus noble and chivalrous, and also that it is just that, a game, and a venue for sportsmanship

and skill. Also at Linz the verb formation haben gerennt is used to recount the individual jousts.

Meaning simply ‘they [the competitors] ran’, the term refers to the two knights who are

‘running’ or, more specifically, ‘jousting’. There is a lack of detail in these sparse phrases

accompanying the illustrations, but a clear knowledge of the event by the author is implied in

the minimal text.

17 Fallows, Jousting in Medieval and Renaissance Iberia, pp. 24-25. 18 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 13.

116

And even within these relatively negligible narratives, secondary as they are to the

imagery, there is still variety of terminology to be found in the descriptions. Interestingly, there

is a marked change over time in how the jousts are described at each tournament featured in

BSB, Cod.icon 398. Later in the manuscript the narrative passage preceding a tournament held

at Nuremberg in 1491 also uses Ritterspiele (‘knightly games’) to describe the subsequent

competitions.19 New language, however, is used to describe the individual jousts. Specific

nouns are now used to label each joust rather than just the competitors’ names along with a

verb. One noun used is Treffen, or ‘encounter’, a fairly general catchword. Yet also at

Nuremberg the term Rennen appears as a noun rather than a verb. Here the first mention of a

Gestech may be found as well.20 And again, later, at a tournament in Innsbruck in 1497, the

word Rennen appears as a noun rather than a verb.21 Finally, at a tournament in Heidelberg in

1511, the nouns Rennen and Stechen (rather than Gestech, although this is the subsequent form

used) both appear in the brief introductory text rather than the previously more popular

Ritterspiele, the more specific names for two types of joust replacing the general ‘knightly

games’.22

The appearance first of the terms Rennen and then Gestech offers a more explicit

description of these different Ritterspiele in the Turnierbuch. Each joust thereafter in Heidelberg

(1511) is clearly labelled as either a Rennen or a Gestech, and the two types are more equally

presented than in any previous tournament featured in the manuscript. This change over time

could be a mark of Maximilian’s influence on the tournament and of a regulation of the

19 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 47. 20 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plates 55-57. 21 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 39: Dass Rennen geschach Zue Innsprukh Am gailen Montag im

Vierzehenhundert und im 97 Jare 22 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 59.

117

terminology. The distinct evolution of a language of tournaments begins to become clear and

is perfectly represented through this manuscript.

On the other hand, there is often less assumed knowledge present in those references

to tournaments which appear in letters relating to other subjects and in which the tournament

might be incidental, or by authors not familiar with the world and specific language of

tournaments. Although some may still follow the same formulaic procedure seen above in

BSB, Cod.icon 398. For example, the German humanist Georg Spalatin, writing about a

tournament held in Mechlin in 1494, resorts to a basic list when describing the various

mounted jousts. The language to describe these games over the several days they take place is

also fairly consistent. The phrase haben gerannt und gestochen is used to encompass the actions of

the entire group of knights who take part in a day’s combats.23 In describing the individual

combats, haben gerannt or haben gereut is used most often, although haben gestochen appears

occasionally as well, presumably depending upon the type of mounted joust undertaken,

although this is not clarified.

This narrative formula does, however, at least draw a linguistic distinction between

different forms of joust. Additionally, in the short phrases used to describe each encounter, no

one knight is ever explicitly singled out by Spalatin as the ‘winner’; rather the end result is

implied by who was unhorsed or fell. The most common result by far in these encounters is

the mutual unhorsing of both combatants, expressed by the phrase sind beid gefallen (‘both fell’).

Occasionally two knights appear to compete against each other more than once, which is

expressed by the phrase sind beid zweimal gefallen (‘both fell twice’). This mutual defeat is seen

frequently, except when the combatants miss each other entirely, as when two knights nie

23 Unusual and/or inconsistent variations on the verbs rennen and stechen are not at all uncommon in the ENHG spellings, which have been maintained throughout.

118

getroffen (‘never met’). When one knight is described as being the only one who fell (allein

gefallen), this is the closest Spalatin comes to clearly stating the winner of a joust.24

Other primary sources, however, follow a more narrative, prose fashion in describing a

joust; there is a distinction between formulaic descriptions versus narrative ones. This is most

often seen when little focus is placed on the actual tournament, and it is merely an incidental

aside, taking up only a sentence or so. For example, in March of 1500, when Maximilian was

attending the imperial diet of Augsburg, he travelled to Munich to hold a tournament and to

go hunting. Thomas Krull, dean of Brandenburg, writing to Elector Joachim I of Brandenburg,

described in passing how the nobles apparently gerent und gestochen in the welsche style when in

fact they ought to be in Augsburg.25

As seen above, the matter of talking about tournaments, even (or perhaps particularly)

when restricted to roughly Maximilian’s lifetime (i.e. the late fifteenth to early sixteenth

centuries) involves great depth and breadth of consideration of language, etymology,

translation, terminology, and sources. It is impossible to write about the topic in English

without giving full deference to the source language, and it cannot be simply boiled down into

two words: Gestech and Rennen (as will be discussed in the next section). Table 3 gives an idea of

the diversity of words, both verbs and nouns, which were used at this time when writing about

tournaments in German as they have been located across a variety of primary sources, before

even taking into consideration the highly specific forms which will now be examined in the

next section of this chapter.

24 Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, pp. 230-32. 25 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 3, 1 n. 10022, n. 10036. Original source: Merseburg,

Deutsches Zentralarchiv; Geheimes Staatsarchiv, Repositur X, Nummer ZY (Planetenzeichen), Faszikel 2 K, fol. 12 f.; Vienna, Hofkammerarchiv, Gedenkbücher 7, fol. 72=70; fol. 72v f.=70v f.; fol. 73v f.=71v f.

119

Verbs Nouns Group combat Foot/unspecified

forms of combat

rennen Rennen Massenkämpf Turnier zu Füß

stechen Gestech Massenturnier Schwertkämpfe

turnieren Turnier(e) Turney Waffenübungen

treffen Treffen Waffenspielen

kämpfen Ritterspiel(e)

reuten Kriegspiel(e)

Ritt

Deutsch-, Französisch-,

Italienisch-, Welsch Art

Table 3: A Selection of Tournament Terminology

3.3. The Tourney

Before the individual-focused, one-on-one combat format of the joust became popular, the

tourney was the most common form of tournament competition. The group combat

characteristic of the tourney was already one of the oldest and most well-established forms of

competition by Maximilian’s day. And although it had largely been supplanted in popularity by

the one-on-one joust, tourneys were still held in Maximilian’s court. No mention in textual or

illustrated sources of Maximilian taking part in these group combats is to be found, however.

(Although he must have, at least as a young man, as surviving armour would seem to attest to

the fact.) This is logical, as there would have been little chance for Maximilian to stand out in

such a competition, which also lacked the visual impact of the one-on-one joust. Instead the

120

tourney at Maximilian’s court seems to have served as a supplement to the main competition

and not as the focal point itself, as seen in Maximilian’s 1495 combat with Claude de Vauldrey.

After their encounter – the undeniable main attraction – a tourney took place between the

other German noblemen there present.26 It was a chance for others present to partake in the

excitement of the day’s events but without taking too much attention away from Maximilian.

In its idealised form illustrated in the Triumphzug, one set of five tourneyers on foot,

(although equipped for mounted combat) and one set of five on horseback are represented.27

Their equipment more closely resembles that used in numerous forms of the Rennen rather

than the Gestech. The lances are pointed, with small, circular vamplates, and the shield

integrates a bevor which protects the lower face.28 The primary difference in armour is the

helmet. The tourneyers wear close-helms with visors, unlike the sallets found in most forms of

the Rennen. The visors are distinctly pointed, with the lower edge of the vision slit slightly

protruding to better protect the eyes; ventilation holes for ease of breathing are visible on the

riders’ right sides. The tourneyers wear the most elaborate crests – large plumes of feathers –

of all those seen in the Gestech and the Rennen. The horses wear shaffrons (not blind), crinnets,

and bards covered with rich textiles (the laces affixing the textiles are clearly visible). Of

particular interest in the Triumphzug is the fact that the tourneyers in are led by an individual

figure, Anthony von Yfan, who is named as Turniermeister (‘tourney master’). Such a position of

honour created by Maximilian, and the presence of the tourney alongside other more elaborate

26 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts vom Schaumberg, p. 157. 27 See Appendix 1, Figure 4. 28 For a detailed definition and discussion of the armour and equipment used in the various

forms of joust described in this chapter, see Chapter 4. Alternatively, see Appendix 2: Glossary.

121

and complex forms of individual joust, is a sign of Maximilian’s favour of this form of

combat.29

3.3.a The Kolbenturnier

There are also, it should be pointed out, omissions from Maximilian’s carefully curated

collection of styles of joust found in the Triumphzug. And just as the varieties which the

emperor chose to honour and highlight are significant and reveal the Maximilian’s personal

preferences to his audience, both medieval and modern, so too do the ones he chose to omit.

An excellent, and the most notable, example of this is the Kolbenturnier (‘baton tournament’).

This combat on horseback was normally fought by groups of competitors, rather than one-on-

one, and instead of lances the men would use blunted swords or clubs in an attempt to knock

the crests off of their opponents’ helmets, which were characterised by their distinctive large

metal grilles across the face allowing for a wide range of vision. By Maximilian’s day this form

was largely going out of fashion.30

The Kolbenturnier was not, however, completely extinct by this time. Indeed, the

Turnierbuch of Maximilian’s contemporary, the German nobleman Ludwig von Eyb, is made up

entirely of images exclusively of the Kolbenturnier.31 Of its ten images of combat, all are of the

Kolbenturnier. In each of the fairly rudimentally drawn images, knights in a small, enclosed arena

use blunt swords or clubs to try to knock the prominent crests off their opponents’ helms.32

29 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 43. 30 Helmut Nickel, ‘The Tournament: An Historical Sketch’, in The Study of Chivalry: Resources and

Approaches, ed. by Howell Chickering and Thomas H. Seiler (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1988), p. 227; Jackson, Tournaments and the German Chivalric renovatio: Tournament Discipline and the Myth of Origins’, pp. 80-81.

31 Munich, BSB, Cgm 961, plates 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, and 34. 32 See Appendix 1, Figure 5.

122

A variation of the Kolbenturnier also appears in the Turnierbuch of patrician tournament

fighter Marx Walther in which the riders are minimally equipped and bearing what look like

straw/wicker shields and helms in the traditional Kolbenturnier style while riding bareback.33

They carry lances shorter than those used in the joust and with flared, trumpet-like ends which

the men appear to use to either knock their opponents’ crests from their helms, although

knocking each other from their horses seems acceptable as well based on the image.34 A

virtually identical depiction of this style of Kolbenturnier appears in BSB, Cod.icon 398 at a

tournament in Nuremberg in 1491 which Maximilian hosted and took part in (although not in

this particular combat).35

Thus, despite its absence from the Triumphzug, the Kolbenturnier was still practiced

during Maximilian’s reign, both by his contemporaries and at tournaments in which he was

personally involved. Furthermore, Maximilian himself did, at some point, participate in the

Kolbenturnier, as evidenced by a Kolbenturnierhelm attributed to him and currently held in

Vienna.36 Its estimated time of creation, however, dates to Maximilian’s younger years, before

he became Holy Roman emperor or possibly even Romischer König, when he was still a young

knight building his reputation in the tournament but not shaping its legacy. This could explain

why, although the armour survives, no textual source from Maximilian’s reign describes him

taking part in any sort of tourney, since, as a ruler in his own right, it may have been

considered beneath him at that point. The same goes for his lack of appearance in this form of

combat in any of the Turnierbücher representing historical tournaments. Tied with this, the

Kolbenturnier’s later exclusion from commemorative works the Triumphzug or Freydal is a sign of

33 See Appendix 1, Figure 6. 34 Munich, BSB, Cgm 1930, plates 17-18. 35 See Appendix 1, Figure 7. 36 See Appendix 3, numbers 28 and 29.

123

Maximilian’s lack of interest in the form and his clear preference for the mounted joust, even

in group combat (i.e. the tourney), to play a greater role in his memory.

3.4 The Gestech

At the most fundamental level, the difference between the Gestech and the Rennen may be

defined by the former’s use of coronel tipped lances and the latter’s of hooked or pointed

lances. In the Gestech the object was to either unhorse one’s opponent or, ideally, to splinter a

lance on him, while in the Rennen unhorsing was the primary aim.37 However, along with this

basic division come numerous and wide-ranging variations in arms, armour, and rules of

conduct for these two courses, which will be expanded upon below. These many forms

represent the tournament as it was practised in Maximilian’s court, and, as will be seen, in his

time the line between the Rennen and Gestech was not always clear, but rather was often blurred

as the two forms occasionally intermingled and evolved.

There are four sub-categories of the Gestech which can be analysed independently. Not

as many forms of the Gestech exist as do of the Rennen, where Maximilian’s tournaments fully

embraced a creative range of joust forms.

3.4.a The Deutschgestech

The so-called Deutschgestech, as it is labelled in the Triumphzug, is the apparently definitive

version of the standard Gestech as practiced in Maximilian’s court.38 In sources which mention a

37 The evidence for these differing goals is best found in the equipment used in the Gestech and the Rennen, discussed in Chapter 4.

38 For the purposes of consistency throughout this thesis, the spellings of these forms of joust will be presented as compound nouns (Deutschgestech), rather than a noun phrase (Deutsch Gestech).

124

Gestech at Maximilian’s court, it is likely this form of the joust to which they are referring.39 This

could be a way of distinguishing this style of joust featuring blunted lances and frog-mouth

helms, a common enough form of joust throughout Europe at this time, as the unique

German version of such. The lack of a Deutsch- preposition for a Rennen would seem to mark

the Rennen in general as such a distinctly German form of joust that it did not need to be

specified as such.

The numerous examples given in Chapter 2 attest to the popularity of this joust in

Maximilian’s court. In the Triumphzug, the knights of the Deutschgestech are shown with frog-

mouth helms, which is the standard style of helm across all versions of the Gestech.40 They also

wear full vambraces, with reinforcing plates around the neck. They carry a small, concave

shield. A queue to hold the lance is visible on the knights’ backs. The vamplate is small and the

lance tipped with three-pronged coronels. The lances are also noticeably thicker than those

used in the other forms of Gestech. The knights each wear a distinctive crest featuring physical

objects, such as antlers, wings, and an owl. The horses wear full caparisons which also cover

their eyes, as well as rings of bells around their necks. Around their necks they also wear

Stechkissen, large padded bumpers which protect their chests as well as the legs of the riders,

eliminating the knights’ need for leg armour.41

3.4.b The Welschgestech

The Welschgestech (and its corresponding form the Welschrennen) is one of the most unique and

distinctive forms of mounted joust practiced at Maximilian’s court. This joust represents one

39 There is, it should be noted, no corresponding Deutschrennen. The equivalent is more likely to be the term occasionally used, Scharfrennen, to refer to a standard German Rennen.

40 See Appendix 1, Figure 8. 41 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 46.

125

of the most significant evolutions of the tournament to be popularised by Maximilian: the use

of the tilt. The tilt was a wooden barrier which separated the competing knights, allowing them

to approach each other without colliding.42 The tilt was revolutionary in the tournament world

in that it would have minimised risk both to the horses and their riders while increasing the

likelihood of the knights successfully striking each other with their lances (missing being an all

too common result in many jousts).

When and where exactly the tilt first came into use is an issue of much contention.

William Henry Jackson claims the tilt originated in Italy in the early fifteenth century, coming

into use in Germany under Maximilian in the early sixteenth century.43 Helen Watanabe-

O’Kelly believes it was introduced around 1420 (although she gives no reason for the

specificity of that date).44 According to Barber and Barker, the tilt was a Spanish or Portuguese

invention dating from the early fifteenth century and comes from the Spanish word for cloth,

tela, indicating that it was originally a cloth suspended from a rope running down the centre of

the lists (although they do not follow on and explain how it developed into a wooden

barrier).45 These are just a few examples of the conflicting opinions on the origins of this piece

of tournament equipment.

The German name for the joust with a tilt offers no clues, as welsch was a general

ENHG term for speakers of Romance languages. It could often refer specifically to Italians,

but also was applied to other European groups, such as the Burgundians or the French. This

frequent connection of welsch to the Italians lends credence to the idea that the tilt was often

42 The noun ‘tilt’ was also subsequently turned into a verb, ‘tilting’, which became a synonym for jousting itself in English.

43 William Henry Jackson, ‘The Tournament and Chivalry in German Tournament Books’, p. 59. 44 Watanabe-O’Kelly, Triumphall Shews: Tournaments at German-speaking Courts in their European

Context 1560-1730, p. 14. 45 Barber and Barker, Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry and Pageants in the Middle Ages, pp. 194-96.

126

used in Italian jousts and that Maximilian might have come to particularly enjoy and appreciate

this form following his second marriage to Bianca Maria Sforza of Milan in 1494. Each time a

contemporary chronicle or letter describes Maximilian taking part in an ‘Italian-style’ joust

(Italienisch), it is tempting to imagine that this is a reference to a Welschgestech or –rennen.

However, the tilt also appears regularly in earlier fifteenth century depictions of Burgundian

tournaments.46 Maximilian’s adoption of this joust as one of his favourites could thus be more

closely related to his first marriage to Mary of Burgundy and the influence of that tournament

culture.

While the tilt was still a novelty in the German joust, problems could arise from not

knowing how to construct and use it properly. Georg Spalatin wrote that at a tournament at

which Maximilian was present several un-named Walen und Niederländer ran a Welschgestech over

a ‘barrier’ (Schranken), or tilt. They struck each with hard blows and broke many spears,

according to Spalatin. Unfortunately the eyes and ears of several horses were reportedly injured

as well, as the barrier was too low.47 The tilt was meant to be quite a high barrier, customarily

coming up to roughly the level of the the horse’s back while still allowing the knights’ lances to

46 For example see Imagining the Past in France: History in Manuscript Painting, 1250-1500, ed. by Elizabeth Morrison and Anne D. Hedeman (Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2010), p. 250; here (in an image originally from Saint Petersburg, National Library of Russia, MS.Fr.F.p.XIV.4) is a Burgundian count competing in a joust over a tilt at a pas d’armes in 1446 (manuscript produced c. 1470-1480). Additionally, in a fifteenth-century French context, a tilt also appears in an image of a 1438 joust between Sir John Astley of England and Pierre de Masse, which took place in Paris; Young, Tudor and Jacobean Tournaments, pp. 74-75.

47 Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, p. 230-31. Spalatin writes, Haben einander hart troffen und viel Spieß zerbrochen, auch den Pferden Augen aus und Ohren abgestoßen, aus Ursachen daß die Schranken zu niedrig waren.

127

comfortably clear it.48 Images like many of those in Freydal demonstrate the proper use of the

tilt.49

The Welschgestech is the first of the illustrations of unique varieties of mounted joust to

appear in the Triumphzug.50 Placing it first in the line-up of forms of tournament competition

gives it a place of prestige. Most significantly the tilt does not feature in the image, even though

it was the central, defining feature of this style of joust. While the Triumphzug is meant to

portray a parade of people and objects in motion, and including a stationary barrier may have

been illogical (although it could be argued that ‘logic’ is a meaningless parameter in such a

fantastical work), it may also be that Maximilian assumed a level of knowledge on the part of

his audience and believed that they would know that the very title Welschgestech meant the use of

a tilt. The frequency with the welsch- style jousts were held at his court would mean that by the

time of the Triumphzug’s creation it was a well enough known and established event that

Maximilian took for granted an understanding of its central feature (indeed, the same principle

applies to all the jousts, as discussed above).

The knights in the Triumphzug are shown wearing the frog-mouth style helm seen in all

iterations of the Gestech. They wear full vambraces on their arms, including gauntlets, even with

the protection provided by the vamplate on the lance, which is relatively small. The lances are

tipped with three-pronged coronels. The knights carry concave shields which come up above

the base of their helms and are fastened to their breastplates. A lance rest is also visible on the

48 The length of the tilt in illustrations of the time is often misleading as well, as it is far too short. It would in fact have been very long. In England, for example, by the early sixteenth century, the tilt in the tournament grounds at Greenwich was 150 yards long, while that at Whitehall was 107 yards long. The one built for the famous tournament of the Field of Cloth of Gold (1520), an entirely temporary setup, was still 88 yards long. Young, Tudor and Jacobean Tournaments, p. 76.

49 von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 2. See Appendix 1, Figure 9. 50 See Appendix 1, Figure 10.

128

breastplates, although there is no queue attached at the back. They wear greaves and sabatons

on their lower legs. Their upper legs are covered by long cloth tonnlets protected by a large

raised pommel and ridge on the front of the saddle. They also all wear crests of large plumes of

feathers. The horses wear full caparisons which tie in the front and metal shaffrons. Their

vision is unobscured.51

3.4.c The Hohenzeuggestech

One particularly interesting form of Gestech, which would already have been old-fashioned in

Maximilian’s time but which he continued to uphold, was the Hohenzeuggestech. It was named

for the unique high saddle (the titular hohes Zeug), which forced the rider to stand upright in his

stirrups while sitting elevated off the horse’s back on a central bar with his legs slipped through

two rings on either side to hold him in place. Large wooden panels extending down over the

horse’s shoulders also protected his lower torso and legs. This would have given the rider very

little control over his horse and required great strength and skill. A surviving example of one

of these saddles is preserved in the Royal Armouries.52 Although not specifically affiliated with

Maximilian, the saddle is German and dates from around 1500, showing that such objects were

still being produced at that date.53

Although textual sources describing Maximilian’s tournaments do not specify if the

jousts being performed are ever the Hohenzeuggestech – either because it was incidental

information or the authors were not knowledgable of the terminology – it does appear in

51 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 45. 52 Leeds, UK, Royal Armouries, Object Number VI.94. 53 See Appendix 1, Figure 11. For more on this particular saddle, see Marina Viallon, ‘A German

High Tournament Saddle in the Royal Armouries, Leeds’ Arms and Armour 12 (2015), 103-23.

129

commemorative forms in Freydal and the Triumphzug.54 Maximilian then clearly had an interest

in preserving this form, perhaps as a representation of the history of a uniquely German form

of joust. In Freydal, the reader gets to see the hohes Zeug in action as Maximilian and his

opponent break their lances on each other in close quarters whilst balancing in the precarious

saddles. Leather straps, supplementing the wooden loops, may be seen holding the knights in

place.55

The idealised representation of the Hohenzeuggestech, as it appears in the Triumphzug,

features knights in frog-mouth helms and full vambraces, as well as two rondels on their

chests. The concave jousting shields may be seen to be tied to the breastplate in the centre.

The lances are blunted with coronel tips. The knights wear sabatons with elongated, pointed

toes, symbolic of the nostalgic qualities of this joust. The horses wear full caparisons and metal

shaffrons with additional crinnets to protect their necks. They also wear bells around their

necks. The knights are visibly raised off the back of their horses by the high-saddle, and a large,

circular harness, similar in form to the padded Stechkissen, circles the chests of the horses,

protecting the riders’ legs. Convex spherical protrusions on the front allow room for the

horses’ shoulder joints to have full range of movement.56

3.4.d The Gestech im Beinharnisch

Finally, there is the Gestech im Beinharnisch, which, like the Hohenzeuggestech, was a

relatively old-fashioned form of joust in Maximilian’s time.57 The Gestech im Beinharnisch simply

54 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 47. 55 See Appendix 1, Figure 12. 56 See Appendix 1, Figure 13. 57 Wendelin Boehim, Handbuch der Waffenkunde: Das Waffenwesen in seiner historischen Entwicklung vom

Beginn des Mittelalters bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig: Verlag von E. A. Seemann, 1890), pp. 552-53.

130

means the Gestech ‘in leg armour’. Definitive descriptions of this joust actually being practiced

in Maximilian’s court are difficult to find, although it should be said that a lack of the explicit

description of a Beinharnisch does not mean that passing references to a Gestech being held might

not include this variety of joust. Clephan speculated that in this joust unhorsing of one’s

opponent was the primary goal, an objective which was made easier by the knights’ leg armour,

which would have made gripping the horse more difficult.58 However, another interpretation

could also be given.

The Gestech im Beinharnisch does appear in the Triumphzug, indicating its importance, at

least as a token of nostalgia, to Maximilian. This joust is the final manifestation of the Gestech

which features in the Triumphzug.59 Despite its name seemingly emphasising the use of leg

armour, the knights in this image do not appear to be equipped with armour significantly

different from that used in other forms of the Gestech, such as the Welschgestech. They wear

noticeable armour to protect their shins, calves, and knees, as well as rounded sabatons on

their feet. The so-called Beinharnisch does not appear particularly distinctive in its form. It

would, however, have played a more critical role in this Gestech, as, unlike its visually similar

counterpart the Welschgestech, there would have been no barrier between the two riders

protecting their legs. So in this joust the Beinharnisch plays a critical protective role which draws

special attention to it. This is particularly noticeable again when compared to other forms of

the Gestech - the Deutschgestech and the Hohenzeuggestech - where a large Stechkissen or an

independent element of the saddle protect the knights’ legs, eliminating the need for leg

armour entirely. This is the only Gestech where the knight’s legs are fully exposed to the

58 Clephan, The Tournament: Its Periods and Phases, pp. 97-98. 59 See Appendix 1, Figure 14.

131

oncoming rider and his lance, with only armour to protect them and no additional element,

thus justifying the attention focused in its name upon the Beinharnisch.60

Additionally, the knights illustrated in the Triumphzug wear the customary frog-mouth

helm, topped with a crest of a wreath of laurel leaves. The lances are coronel-tipped. While the

knights wear upper-body armour with rondels on the shoulders and bear the distinctive

concave Gestech shield, they only wear gloves and not metal gauntlets. Tassets are clearly visible

protecting their upper thighs, adding to the complete Beinharnisch. A queue is also fitted to their

backs, as seen in the Deutschgestech as well. The horses wear metal shaffrons, one of which is

blind, and caparisons, as well as bells around their necks. The caparison of the outermost horse

can be seen to be in multiple sections tied together with points. A spherical projection at the

horse’s shoulder, like those on the saddle of the Hohenzeuggestech, imply the presence of a metal

bard beneath the textile caparison. The clearly rigid appearance of the outer textile further adds

to this likelihood. Again, this was a likely requirement for this joust due to the lack of a barrier

or other protective elements found in other forms of the Gestech. The saddle used is similar in

form to that of the Welschgestech.

3.5 The Rennen

Unlike the Gestech, the Rennen always utilised non-rebated lances (although this did not

necessarily mean that the lances were as sharp as those used on the battlefield) which were not

as thick as those used in the Gestech; rather, they tended to be slimmer and, critically, not

hollow. The Rennen could also be far more hazardous than the Gestech in its various

incarnations, but the multitude of forms preserved in the Triumphzug and the frequent

60 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 48.

132

examples of its occurrence in Maximilian’s court attest to his particular enjoyment of this joust,

whose various forms allowed for a creative expression of the many manifestations of the

German tournament.

One example of this are the many forms of the Rennen which also featured mechanical,

or ‘exploding’, pieces of armour. These represent a trend not seen in the Gestech. Two wing

shaped plates were sometimes fastened over the brow of the sallet by pins and were meant to

fly off when struck.61 In yet another type the vamplate of the lance, which protected the hand

holding it, also could be engineered to fly off if hit. This reflects the skill and ingenuity of the

medieval armourer at this time. Due to the association of these mechanical elements of armour

with the more hazardous Rennen, Barber and Barker have speculated that it represents a less

serious attitude toward the joust and a concession to its growing disconnection from reality.

These mechanical devices, as they put it, were produced ‘more for the entertainment of

spectators than for the protection of the participants’. Spectacle in both the Rennen and the

Gestech had at last trumped any semblance of actual fighting, and this concession was

represented in the armour for both, whether it was through fantastic exploding armour or the

creation of a suit to render a man invincible.62 However, this is true only in the sense that these

elements were indeed added for entertainment purposes and offered no practical protection. It

must be noted, though, that they do not necessarily represent a less serious attitude toward the

joust. Rather, as will be seen, this intense focus on categorising the different forms and

promoting the technological innovations within them, such as the mechanical features, signify

instead a very serious attitude indeed toward the joust.

61 Claude Blair, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700 (London: B.T. Batsford, 1958), pp. 162-63.

62 Barber and Barker, Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry and Pageants in the Middle Ages, p. 162.

133

3.5.a The Welschrennen

Despite the seeming prominence of the Rennen over the Gestech in general in Maximilian’s

court, the Welschrennen appears to have been less popular than its counterpart the Welschgestech.

Simply by examining the images in Freydal, one sees that the Welschgestech appears more than

any other form of the Gestech, while the Welschrennen does not appear at all. The Welschrennen is

the first style of Rennen to appear in the parade of the Triumphzug, just as the Welschgestech is the

first form of Gestech.63 Also like the image of the Welschgestech, no barrier is illustrated, its

presence an assumed knowledge. The most distinctive visual element which separates this

Rennen from the other forms in the Triumphzug is the helm worn by the knights. In the

Welschrennen they wear a close helm, fully enclosing the rider’s face, with a visor and attached

bevor. These are crowned with laurel wreaths. The lances, as with all varieties of the Rennen,

come to a multi-faceted point. The vamplate of the Welschrennen is small, similar to those on

the Gestech lances. The knights wear upper body armour and gauntlets as well as leg harnesses.

An oblong, slightly concave shield, similar to many of those in the Gestech, protects the left

sides of their bodies, and each has a rondel in its centre – a specific target of sorts. The saddle

is like that of the Welschgestech. Also like the Welschgestech, the knights have a lance rest attached

to their breastplate, but no queue at the back. The horses wear full caparisons which cover

their eyes, shaffrons, and bells around their necks.64

63 See Appendix 1, Figure 15. 64 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 49.

134

3.5.b The Geschiftrennen

The Geschiftrennen is one of several forms of the Rennen practiced in Maximilian’s court to

feature mechanical or spring-loaded elements of armour. These mechanical Rennen were very

popular in Maximilian’s court, and several surviving suits of armour attributed to the emperor

feature these unique attributes.65

The illustration of the Geschifftrennen in the Triumphzug also emphasises the mechanical

elements of the armour.66 The shields in this joust are, like in the Bundrennen (see Section 3.5.e),

in the process of flying up into the air. Unlike the Bundrennen, however, the shields in the

Geschiftrennen not only fly up when struck, but also split into multiple segments. Smaller plates

which lie on top of the shields are shown springing off them. The shape of the shields are

similar to the Bundrennen – oblong and concave – but they do not have a textile covering. The

mechanical attachment fixing the shield to the breastplate is clearly visible, and a bevor

protecting the knights’ lower faces is also attached. The riders wear sallets again, topped with

crowns of laurel wreaths. They wear full leg harnesses and vambraces, including gauntlets, with

queues affixed to their backs. The lances are pointed, and the vamplates are like those of the

Bundrennen. The horses wear minimal textile caparisons, covering only their flanks and chests.

They are not blind and wear no bells. The saddles are the same as those used for the

Welschrennen.67

65 See Appendix 3 for examples. 66 See Appendix 1, Figure 16. 67 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 51.

135

3.5.c The Scheibenrennen

Closely tied to the above, in BSB, Cod.icon 398 an occurrence of one of these mechanical

Rennen is illustrated at the tournament at Linz (1491). There a joust between Maximilian

himself and his Turniermeister Anthony von Yfan is labelled das gestifft [or geschift] Scheiben

Rennen.68 In the image the exploded elements of armour are clearly visible. This blending of the

two terms for the different forms of Rennen, Geschift- and Scheiben-, emphasises their similarity.

They seem, at least according the producer of that text and image, to be interchangeable.

In the Triumphzug, unlike the previous forms of the Rennen, the Scheibenrennen utilises

small circular shields.69 The image again emphasises the shields breaking apart and flying up

into the air; this time wedge-shaped slices detach from the circular shield. The same fastening

as in the Geschiftrennen for attaching the shield may be seen on the knights’ chests. The knights

wear bevors, with full vambraces and leg harnesses, with the addition of tassets, and sallets

with crowns of laurel leaves. The lances and vamplates are the same as those used in the

Geschiftrennen, again emphasising their similarity. The horses wear full caparisons which cover

their eyes, along with shaffrons and circles of bells around their necks.70

3.5.d The Schweifrennen

The Schweifrennen may have received its name from Schweif, meaning ‘tail’, a possible reference

to the queue which held the lance in place.71 This is yet another example of a joust using

mechanical, exploding elements; in the Schweifrennen the shields fly up into the air when struck.

68 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 31. The joust of ‘exploding discs’. 69 See Appendix 1, Figure 17. 70 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 52. 71 Nickel and Breiding, ‘A Book of Tournaments and Parades from Nuremberg’, p. 132.

136

An alternate name for the Schweifrennen was the Scharfrennen, and it was probably the most

commonly practiced form of Rennen.72

The Schweifrennen appears three times in BSB, Cod.icon 398. Firstly, at a tournament in

Nuremberg in 1491, Maximilian jousted against Schenk Chrisoph von Limpurg in an image

explicitly labelled (with an alternate ENHG spelling) Schwaiff.73 The Schweifrennen appears again

in the text at Innsbruck in 1497 when Maximilian competed against Sigmund von Welsperg,

and again at Innsbruck in 1498 when he competed against Count Hans von Montfort.74

In the Triumphzug, the Schweifrennen is very similar to the Bundrennen.75 The lances are

pointed, with large, half-circular vamplates. The shields are depicted as springing up into the

air. They are intact and have a textile covering. Although the shields are the same, the riders

wear bevors under their shields, not the H-frame seen in the Bundrennen. Their sallets are

topped with the customary crest of laurel wreaths. They wear no visible upper-body armour

beyond the shield, although they do carry queues at their backs. Tassets protect their upper

thighs, while dilgen protect their lower thighs and knees. The horses wear full caparisons

which cover their eyes and bells around their necks.76

3.5.e The Bundrennen

The Bundrennen is one of several forms of Rennen which seems to be mentioned by name solely

in the Triumphzug.77 These forms of Rennen may not have been practiced as commonly in

Maximilian’s court, but may rather represent idealised forms of joust (particularly in the case of

72 Clephan, The Tournament: Its Periods and Phases, p. 97. 73 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 49. 74 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 41, 45. 75 See Appendix 1, Figure 18. 76 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 55. 77 For an etymology of Bund, see DWB, Bd. 2, Sp. 516-19.

137

the Pfannenrennen, discussed below) or ones of which he was aware and wished to memorialise,

or to be associated with his name, but did not practice regularly in real life.

In the Triumphzug, the Bundrennen offers the first illustration of the mechanical Rennen, a

joust featuring the spring-loaded, mechanical pieces of armour.78 In the woodcut, three of the

five knights’ shields are shown in the midst of springing off above their heads. This and

subsequent images of the spring-loaded armours are clearly not depicting a specific moment of

combat or a realistic joust-in-progress. Instead this image is meant to show what the armour

was capable of doing in an abstract setting. The shields which are in the act of flying up into

the air are large enough to protect the bearer’s entire left side, and they also include an attached

bevor, coming up high enough to protect the lower half of the knight’s face. They are covered

in fabric, the excess of which hangs off the shield’s edge. The metal framework holding the

shield in place is visible beneath them – an H-shaped frame which attaches to the knights’

sallet-style helms.

Again, the knights wear crowns of laurel wreaths on their helms. The lances are

pointed and the vamplates are much larger than those in the previously illustrated jousts and

have an oblong shape, acting as protection for the upper body in place of further armour. They

form only a half-circle, the large shield protecting the left half of the body and the vamplate

the other. The competitors wear minimal upper body armour, showing off opulent clothing

with slashed and puffed sleeves instead. They do wear a queue for the lance at their backs,

however. Tassets protect their upper thighs, while dilgen, not worn by the knights but resting

independently across the saddle, protect their lower thighs. The horses wear full blind

caparisons and bells around their necks.79

78 See Appendix 1, Figure 19. 79 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 50.

138

3.5.f The Feldrennen

The Feldrennen is the next in the series of joust which does not explicitly (at least by that name)

appear in any other source contemporary to Maximilian apart from the Triumphzug. Feld, or

‘field’, however may be a reference to field armour (i.e. armour made to be worn on the

battlefield) and serve as a description of the equipment worn by the knights in this joust, at

least as illustrated in the Triumphzug.

The knights armed for the Feldrennen in the Triumphzug are equipped with pointed

lances with circular vamplates, like those in the Welsch- and Pfannenrennen (see Section 3.5.h).80

They also wear sallets crowned with laurel wreaths. Their shields are similar in shape to those

of the Bundrennen – covering almost all of the left side of the body and coming up to protect

the lower half of the face. Full vambraces with gauntlets and leg harnesses are used as well.

There are no queues in use in this form of Rennen, but a lance rest on the breastplate is visible.

The saddles have the raised pommel and frontal ridge seen in the Welschrennen and others. The

horses wear metal bards similar in shape and style to the caparisons seen in the Geschiftrennen,

but these decorative elements are metal rather than textile. This is evident from the rigidity of

the plates protecting the horses’ chests (under some of which textile padding is visible) and

their clearly evident articulated plates hinges. The horses also wear shaffrons (which do not

cover their eyes) and crinnets.81

80 See Appendix 1, Figure 20. 81 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 54.

139

3.5.g The Wulstrennen

The Wulstrennen and the Pfannenrennen (below) are the most unusual forms of Rennen to appear

in the Triumphzug, and the most outlandish in style. Wulst, which can be translated as ‘puff’,

‘embossment’, or ‘bulge’, could be in reference to the knights’ elaborate and highly exposed

textile clothing in this joust, at least as illustrated in the Triumphzug, and in particular the

sleeves.82 In this joust the ornateness of the textiles worn outshines the armour. Again,

contemporary textual descriptions of this joust do not occur. It seems unlikely, given the

obvious dangers of the minimal equipment, that styles of joust such as the Wulstrennen were

practiced in actuality. The style appears to be more of a tournament-themed tribute to the

Landsknecht, Maximilian’s mercenary military forces consisting mainly of pikemen and foot

soldiers. These men were known for their sumptuous clothing and often wore tunics with

enormous puffed sleeves with a multitude of slashes, allowing another rich textile beneath to

show through.83 It is a style uncannily similar to the jousters of the Wulstrennen.

The Wulstrennen, as it is depicted in the Triumphzug, showcases some unusual

equipment.84 The pointed lances have the large, half-circular vamplate of other forms, such as

the Schweifrennen, and a queue for the lance is visible at the knights’ backs. The knights wear no

upper body armour or leg harnesses, although they do use dilgen. They also wear no helms,

only padded circlets on their heads, along with the crowns of laurel. Their shields are similar in

shape to those of the Feldrennen, but instead of stopping level with the nose they cover the

entire face. Like the distinctive small, square shield used in the Pfannenrennen, this style of shield

82 DWB, Bd. 30, Sp. 1754-60. 83 Robert Jones, Knight: The Warrior and World of Chivalry (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2011), pp.

216-219. 84 See Appendix 1, Figure 21.

140

does not appear in any other form of joust. A narrow, rectangular, horizontal slit at eye level

allows the riders to see. The horses wear full caparisons and wear bells around their necks.85

3.5.h The Pfannenrennen

The Pfannenrennen is a particularly enigmatic form of mounted joust. It is named for the pan-

like, extremely small shield borne by the competitors, which is virtually their only piece of

armour. These had a prominently raised rim to catch the opponent’s lance and, hopefully,

cause it to snap. Hans Burgkmair the Younger, in a 1553 edition of tournament images

originally featured in the Triumphzug, labelled this joust as gar besorglich or ‘extremely

dangerous’.86 Indeed, tournament regulations declared that an open coffin be placed in the lists

for a Pfannenrennen – although this was probably just as much for the excitement of the

spectators than for any practical purpose. However, no evidence has yet been found of the

Pfannenrennen ever actually being run.87 This circles back to the question raised in Chapter 1,

Section 1.3, about how far the Triumphzug is believable as a guide to varieties of joust. In this

instance, t is highly likely that the Pfannenrennen’s inclusion in the Triumphzug was simply a

symbol of the bravery of German knights and the extreme extension of some of the other,

already dangerous, forms of joust.

The knights of the Pfannenrennen in the Triumphzug are staggeringly minimally

equipped.88 They wear no protective upper or lower body armour, or helms, only a small,

square shield on their chests. Instead they wear opulent clothing and laurel wreath crowns on

their heads. They also have queues at their backs. The lances they carry are like those of the

85 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 56. 86 von Hefner, ed., Hans Burgkmaiers Turnier-Buch, plate 8. 87 Nickel, ‘The Tournament: An Historical Sketch’, pp. 226-27. 88 See Appendix 1, Figure 22.

141

Welschrennen, with the circular vamplates. The horses are more appropriately equipped for the

joust than their riders. They wear full caparisons which cover their eyes, along with rings of

bells around their necks.89

3.6 Conclusions

The tourney, the Gestech, and the Rennen, as described above, represent the three central forms

of tournament combat undertaken at Maximilian’s court, often by Maximilian himself. Many of

these forms’ appearances in Freydal provide examples of how combat in each would have

looked. Furthermore, their appearance in numerous incarnations in the Triumphzug signify their

importance to Maximilian as forms which ought to be commemorated. Although a first edition

of the Triumphzug was not published until after Maximilian’s death, it still served its intended

role, forming a central part of the commemorative works of his reign. The tournament images

in particular endured and evolved, taking on a second life as an independent work of their

own. Hans Burgkmair the Younger, son of the artist responsible for the majority of the

Triumphzug’s original woodcuts, produced his own versions of the images c. 1540, which were

heavily based on his father’s.90 The decoration and equipment of the riders is virtually identical

to those in the Triumphzug, although the number of men representing each style of joust have

been reduced to two. Other alterations have been made to the descriptive details which are of

interest. Some examples include:

1. Das gestech indem hochen zeuch: The Hohenzeuggestech is the first mounted joust featured

in this collection. Interestingly, one of the riders has been named specifically as Kaiser

Maximilian and given a crest of peacock feathers and a crown atop his helm to distinguish him.

89 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 53. 90 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 403.

142

This posthumous designation of Maximilian as a participant in this specific form of joust only

in this work could imply a particular favouring by the emperor of the Hohenzeuggestech.

2. Das Deutsch gemain gestech: The word gemein (‘common’ or ‘general’) has been added to

the Deutschgestech, reinforcing its place as the standard form Gestech and most representative of

this distinctly German joust.

3. Das Welsch gestech über das thill: Here, the words über das thill (‘over the tilt’) have been

added to the Welschgestech, making its format of jousting over a barrier even clearer and

highlighting that as its defining factor.

4. Das wallisch Rennen in dem Armentin: For the Welschrennen, by comparison, it is the

armet, the style of close helm worn, which is highlighted as significant, rather than the

presence of a tilt.

5. Das feldt Renen: In this depiction of the Feldrennen, unlike in the Triumphzug, one of the

rider’s shields is seen springing up into the air, a detail not previously recorded.

6. Das Tartschen geschift Rennen: One of the rider’s shields is shown springing away here

as well, as also seen the Geschiftrennen of the original Triumphzug. This trait is further

emphasised, though, by the inclusion of the word Tartsche, or targe (shield).

7. Das geschift scheibe Renen: As seen in BSB, Cod.icon 398, the Scheibenrennen here also

includes geschift as a descriptor, linking these two forms of joust.

These slight alterations and differences help to both reveal more about these forms of

mounted joust as they first appeared in the Triumphzug, as well as to demonstrate how the

understanding of each changed over time. The inclusion of Maximilian himself, for example, as

a participant in the Hohenzeuggestech both lends particular weight to that variety of joust as well

as drawing attention to Maximilian as the central and most important figure in this parade of

jousters. At the same time, the absence of other forms of equestrian tournament competition

143

found in the Triumphzug, most notably the tourney, signal a growing lack of interest in this

form.

Through these examples provided by the Triumphzug, not only the wide variety of

jousts in the tournament which Maximilian endorsed, but also how distinct each one was,

becomes clear. These distinctions are significant. Maximilian brought a new level of rules and

regulations to the world of tournaments; this meant that the tournament was standardised in a

way it never was before. Previously when a tournament was held, guidelines were often issued

for that tournament alone. Now if the German elite knew that a Welschgestech or a Schweifrennen

was to be run, they knew what to expect – what armour and equipment was required, and what

the rules would be. And there is practical evidence of these rules being implemented, as seen in

various examples.

These images in the Triumphzug also reveal several key points about Maximilian’s

preferences for certain styles of mounted joust. For one, his penchant for jousts which utilised

the ‘exploding’ elements of armour is clearly evinced in the styles of joust portrayed in the

Triumphzug. Five separate forms of Rennen (the Bundrennen, Geschiftrennen, Scheibenrennen,

Schweifrennen, and, according to the Burgkmair the Younger prints, the Feldrennen) feature

mechanical, breakaway pieces of armour. Connected to this, a comparison of the forms shows

a much larger proportion of varieties of Rennen than Gestech. This category of joust allowed for

a greater variety of different styles, more theatrical elements, and was clearly favoured by

Maximilian as more modern and cutting-edge. The introduction of both the Gestech and the

Rennen over a tilt are another example of Maximilian’s interest in promoting newer, more

fashionable forms of joust. There are, however, also certain elements of nostalgia which are

present in the Triumphzug, as seen in the inclusion of the Hohenzeuggestech and the tourney.

144

Although other forms of nostalgic or increasingly unfashionable mounted combat, such as the

Kolbenturnier, are pointedly excluded from the work.

145

Chapter 4: Tournament Equipment – Practical

4.1 Introduction

By the fifteenth century in particular, the tournament was in the midst of an interesting

transitional phase. John Hale says that at this time ‘the hold of chivalry over the imagination

long outlasted the withering away of the relevance of its international code of behaviour and

training to the actual practice of war’.1 Several factors contributed to this. As Hale noted, the

evolution of a so-called gentleman’s code was taking over from a chivalric one. Alongside this

went parallel changes in military practice, such as the rise of infantry and firearms. There was

also the emergence of set rules in tournaments, ‘which made them both safer for the

combatants and more attractive as theatrical entertainments for the spectators’.2 These changes

also meant that the tournament was less relevant as a form of military training. It was

becoming more and more about nostalgia and carefully choreographed violence - a taming of

the more reckless tournaments of the past to conform with the ever growing antiquation of

chivalry.3 This is reflected in the equipment utilised.

When considering the arms and armour used in Maximilian’s tournaments, it is

necessary to consider what sets this equipment apart as uniquely suited to the tournament

environment. The development of armour made particularly for the tournament was a natural

evolution sparked by a growing awareness of the problems and dangers faced in the lists. A

connection could be drawn between the emergence of the one-on-one joust as the central

1 John Hale, War and Society in Renaissance Europe (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1985), p. 37.

2 Hale, War and Society in Renaissance Europe, p. 37. 3 Hale is a vocal proponent of this viewpoint: ‘But the tournament, no matter how seductive the

air of nostalgia that glamorized its choreography, could no longer be seen as an adequate training for war,’ War and Society in Renaissance Europe, p. 37.

146

feature of a tournament and the very first references to specialised tournament armour. Thus a

line began to be drawn between jousts fought in armour which either simulated – or was the

same as – that worn on the battlefield and armour which was designed specifically for the joust

and which had no practical application in any other environment. This evolution in turn

allowed for further developments of multiple styles of mounted joust with multiple styles of

armour, a technological advancement of which Maximilian took advantage (as seen in the

previous chapter). By simply examining the armour used generally in the Gestech or the Rennen,

it can be seen how they developed accordingly along these lines.

During the early days of the mêlée, which involved two groups of knights rather than

individual competitors, the primary purpose was to simulate the conditions of war, and thus

different armour would not be required due to the event’s similarity to actual warfare. The

joust was a far more specific form of combat, and thus more specific armour was needed,

particularly as the tournament became a unique event unto itself; one not meant to replicate

battle conditions. One of the earliest known references to this type of specialised armour made

for the tournament alone may be found in the accounts for a royal tournament held by King

Edward I of England at Windsor in July 1278. The armour described in this inventory is

entirely of leather rather than metal; also included are swords are made of whalebone.4

This concept of a leather armour for tournaments was soon supplanted, however, by

improvements and innovations in plate armour. From the middle of the fifteenth century

onward, tournament armour was definitively heavier and more intensively strengthened than

armour for war. Reinforcing plates were often worn over the armour. Mobility was decidedly

4 Samuel Lysons, ‘XXXVI. Copy of a Roll of Purchases made for the Tournament of Windsor Park, in the sixth year of King Edward the first, preserved in the Record Office at the Tower’, Archaeologia, 17 (1814), 297-310.

147

less important than safety. Helms were firmly affixed to the breastplate, preventing the wearer

from turning his head. Lances were blunted and given a three-pronged, coronel tip. By

Maximilian’s day this armour would have been useful only in the lists; that was the only

environment for which it was suited. Yet in that setting it performed an admirable task,

protecting its wearer whilst allowing him to become the most efficient jousting machine

possible.5

This chapter is the first of two examining tournament equipment during Maximilian’s

reign. It will focus on the practical equipment – the arms and armour – while Chapter 5 will

look at the decorative equipment. It will compare and contrast the unique sets of armour used

in the Rennen and in the Gestech; specifically, it will focus on the lance (i.e. the arms) and the

vamplate, the shield, the helmet, the harness, and the equestrian armour.

4.2 Arms and Armour for the Rennen and the Gestech

As discussed in Chapter 3, as the joust evolved in late medieval Germany it split into two

primary forms: the Rennen and the Gestech. What is also important to note is that as the style of

combat in each of these jousts changed and grew distinct so did the armour associated with

them.6 This craft of creating armour and lances unique to specific types of tournament reached

5 Several people have written on the subject of late medieval German arms and armour, and, in particular, armour for the tournament. Established authorities include Blair, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700; Ortwin Gamber, ‘Ritterspiele und Turnierrüstung im Spätmittelalter’, in Das ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter, pp. 513-31; and Boehim, Handbuch der Waffenkunde: Das Waffenwesen in seiner historischen Entwicklung vom Beginn des Mittelalters bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts.

6 Alongside established authority Matthias Pfaffenbichler, Dirk H. Breiding is an excellent source on German tournament armour. See, for example, Breiding, such as ‘Arms and Amour: a Farewell to Persistent Myths and Misconceptions’, in Perspectives on Medieval Art: Learning through Looking, ed. by Ena Giurescu Heller and Patricia C. Pongracz (New York: Museum of Biblical Art, 2010), pp. 167-86 and ‘Harnisch und Waffen des Hoch und Spätmittelalters’, in AufRuhr 1225! Ritter, Burgen und Intrigen – Das Mittelalter an Rhein und Ruhr, ed. by Brunhilde Leenen (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 2010), pp. 129-46.

148

a new height under Maximilian, as harnesses and equipment were made for him and the

tournaments of his court which were fabulous creations unto themselves and which would

have had no place on a battlefield. They were suited only to the lists.

As will be shown, the armour for the various varieties of German Rennen stood

distinctly apart from that for the Gestech. As a whole, armour for the Rennen was characterised

by elements more evocative of the violence of actual warfare (i.e. the non-rebated lanceheads

and sallet helmets), yet at the same time the Rennen also veers even further away from the

reality of combat than its counterpart (i.e. the incredibly theatrical mechanical shields and

breastplates and the more minimal body armour). The arms and armour for the Gestech and all

its forms is in many ways more similar to the traditional tournament armour in use throughout

Europe in the fifteenth century and prior. The prominence of the frog-mouth helm, the

smaller shield, and the coronel lanceheads are all features of tournament armour which had

been in use previously. These are just some of the trademarks which set the armour for the

Gestech apart from that for the Rennen. Like the armour for the Rennen, however, it would have

had no place on the battlefield, having become engineered over time to be suitable only to the

tournament arena. Yet while being restricted to the lists, the armour for the Gestech lacks the

theatrical elements of the mechanical breastplates and shields, which may be found only in the

armour for the Rennen. It represents a more traditional form of tournament combat, with fewer

varieties than are found within the Rennen, fewer risks involved, and fewer elements of

spectacle.

The result in both cases was a form of armour ideally suited to one specific

environment and which enabled its wearer to become the ultimate tournament competitor and,

149

indeed, performer. The overall impression given by both sets of equipment is one of sleek

elegance, but also of strength and an accompanying sense of invulnerability.7

The fantastic design and innovative safety features prevalent in this new and improved

armour were made largely possible by the fact that Maximilian had in his service some of the

most skilled armourers of the age.8 Their workshops were centred around a few select cities in

Maximilian’s empire. Put bluntly by Alan Young: ‘During the fifteenth century, the very best

quality armour was considered to come from […] the south German workshops in Landshut,

Innsbruck and Nuremberg, and above all from the Helmschmied workshop in Augsburg.’9

The Helmschmieds were a dynasty of armourers – one of the late Middle Ages’ most skilled.10

The most prominent members were Jörg Helmschmied, his sons Lorenz and Jörg the

Younger, Lorenz’s son Kolman, and, in turn, Kolman’s son Desiderius. Of these, Lorenz

Helmschmied (c. 1450-1515) created the most items of armour for Maximilian.11

While the Helmschmieds were based in Augsburg, Innsbruck was another centre for

armour production under Maximilian. In 1504, Maximilian founded a court workshop in

Innsbruck which was under the charge of the prominent armourer Konrad Seusenhofer (d.

7 Blair, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700, pp. 159-62. 8 For more on armour production, see Alan Williams, The Knight and the Blast Furnace: A History of

the Metallurgy of Armour in the Middle Ages & the Early Modern Period (Boston: Brill, 2003) and Nickolas Dupras, ‘Armourers and their Workshops: The Tools and Techniques of Late Medieval Armour Production’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Leeds, 2012).

9 Alan Young, Tudor and Jacobean Tournaments, p. 58. 10 The name is also often alternatively spelled Helmschmid. In German, it means ‘helmet smith’. 11 Examples of the work of the Helmschmieds may be seen in the so-called Thun Skizzenbuch

(‘sketchbook’), which was long thought to be lost but has been recently rediscovered and is currently held in the Museum of Decorative Arts in Prague (inv. GK 11.572-B). The Skizzenbuch consists of drawings of armours produced in Augsburg from the late-fifteenth through the seventeenth centuries, including ones for the tournament. Many are thought to have been made for the Habsburgs, and Maximilian in particular, by Lorenz and his son Kolman. While the drawings are most likely the work of a later hand, they still represent the work of the Helmschmieds. Pierre Terjanian, ‘The Art of the Armorer in Late Medieval and Renaissance Augsburg: The Rediscovery of the Thun Sketchbooks’, in Jahrbuch des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien 13/14 (2011/2012), p. 299-305.

150

1517).12 Four years later, in 1508, Maximilian built an ‘armour house’ (harnisch- oder wappenhaws)

in Augsburg as well.13 An inventory taken of the contents of the armour house in 1519, after

Maximilian’s death, survives today and offers an insight into the armour and weapons which

had come into the emperor’s possession over the years. Significantly, a large number of these

items are related specifically to tournaments. There are pieces listed as being explicitly for

either the Rennen or the Gestech (or sub-varieties of these), as well as ones generally for the

tournament. There are also several items of equestrian equipment relating to the tournament,

and there are even a selection of crests (as will be described in the following chapter). The

exact contents of this inventory may be seen in Tables 4 and 5 at the end of this chapter.

4.2.a The Lance and Vamplate

As the instrument through which one won or lost a joust, the lance was of central importance

in the tournament. It was commonly comprised of three elements: the shaft, the lancehead,

and the vamplate. The lance used in forms of the Rennen looked and functioned dramatically

differently from those used in the Gestech.

In a 1519 inventory of Maximilian’s Augsburg Harnischhaus, an impressive total of 407

lanceheads are listed. Out of these, some forty-six are described as being explicity for use in the

Rennen.14 In addition, an even greater 195 are described for use in the Gestech. The inventory

also includes several entries for lance shafts alone, separate from the lanceheads.15 It is

12 Young, Tudor and Jacobean Tournaments, p. 58. 13 Terjanian, p. 309. 14 See Table 4 at the end of this chapter. This is not including a cumulative listing for sixty-seven

lances for the Rennen, Deutsch-, and Welschgestech, as it is not specified how many are allotted to each style of joust.

15 The description of four as being zum anlegen (‘to suit’) implies that they might be used for multiple varieties of joust, perhaps by switching lanceheads.

151

unsurprising that the two should be listed separately, as lanceheads could be reused, while

lance shafts often broke and would have needed to be in constant supply.

Lanceheads for the Gestech are easily identifiable by their three-pronged form, known as

a coronel.16 Such a shape would have helped to disperse the impact when receiving a blow,

hopefully providing enough blunt force to either shatter the lance or unhorse one’s opponent.

In the Rennen, the lancehead retained a roughly pointed shape which was constructed of four

sides tapering to a point. However, this visually more aggressive shape was still far from

identical to lances used in actual warfare. It was blunter and more rounded than a lancehead

truly intended to penetrate armour. Its purpose was to inflict sufficient concentrated force in

order to unhorse one’s opponent. Furthermore the lancehead for the Rennen appears to have

come in two main varieties: pointed or slightly hooked. A reference to these two varieties may

be found in the verse from the Triumphzug: ‘Always promoting new advances / In jousting with

hooked or pointed lances [my emphasis]’.17 Distinct differences between the two varieties may

clearly be seen in images from the Triumphzug.18

The shaft of the Rennen lance was longer and slimmer than that of the Gestech, which

tended to be shorter and thicker.19 It also served a different purpose. While the Gestech lance is

often seen shattering in numerous tournament images, the Rennen lance rarely breaks, and

when it does it tends to be in just one rather than two places, as is more common in the

Gestech. This is because the breaking of the lance in forms of the Rennen was not the ultimate

16 See, for example, Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 46 and Appendix 1, Figure 8.

17 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, pp. 7-8/plate 44. 18 For example, see Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, plate 55, and Appendix 1, Figure

19. 19 A comparison of images in Freydal shows the clear distinction between the two. See, for

example, von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 114 and 115.

152

goal. Instead the purpose of the pointed tip of the lance was often to strike one of the

mechanical or fly-away elements on one’s opponent’s chest. Enhanced accuracy would have

been needed to achieve this. In almost all images of the Rennen seen in Freydal, one or both of

the competing knights has managed to use his lance to send elements of his opponent’s shield

flying in jousts such as the Geschift- or the Scheibenrennen. In the case of the Geschiftrennen, for

example, the shield and the wedge-shaped plates on it are sent clearly up in the air.20 The same

can also be seen in numerous instances of the Bundrennen, where the entire textile covered

shield is clearly knocked away by an opponent’s lance.21 This special effect could be the main

means of keeping score in a Rennen-style joust: a clear indicator to spectators and judges who

had struck the best and most effective blow.

By comparison, in forms of the Gestech the lance of the victor is often depicted as

breaking into several pieces. Just as whoever had, with the strength of his lance blow, managed

to ‘shatter’ his opponent’s armour in the Rennen would be revealed as the winner, whoever had

broken their lance in the Gestech would emerge the victor. This broken lance would serve as

evidence of the strength of the blow. In many images in Freydal, one knight may clearly be seen

to be holding up his broken lance shaft in the air.22 Rather than a sign of defeat, as it might

initially appear, this was a way for the knight to show his victory. In this way the lance in both

the Rennen and the Gestech were valuable aids to scorekeeping.

The vamplate of the Rennen lance was also dramatically different in appearance from

that used in the Gestech, and it served a very different purpose. In fact its role was far more vital

in the Rennen than in the Gestech. The vamplate did not just serve its traditional function of

20 For example, see von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 118. 21 See, for example, von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 74. 22 See, for example, von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 98.

153

protecting the hand holding the lance; it also protected the entire right half of the knight’s

body. In this way, acting in conjunction with the Rennen shield (known as the Renntartsche), the

entire torso was safeguarded; the large Renntartsche protected one half of the upper body, while

the vamplate fit snugly next to it to protect the other half.23 These large vamplate-shield

hybrids, known as Brechschilden, or Brechscheiben, were semi-circular in shape and assembled from

multiple pieces. They were often decorated with rays or a sunburst pattern emenating from the

shaft of the lance.24 In addition no gauntlets were used to guard the right hand, as the vamplate

served this purpose.25

The vamplate in the Gestech, by comparison, was much smaller. It did not need to be as

large as that for the Rennen, as a full harness of plate armour was used to protect the torso.

Thus the vamplate need only serve its original purpose of protecting the hand. Rather than

oblong in shape, the vamplate for the Gestech was small and circular. As in the Rennen, no

gauntlet was worn on the hand grasping the lance beneath the vamplate.26

4.2.b The Shield

A shield of some form was borne by all knights in the joust, and it served a variety of

purposes. In all types of the joust the shield was never held in the hand. Rather, it was always

attached to the cuirass, freeing up the jouster to hold the lance in one hand and the reins in the

other. The shield used in the Gestech, unlike its counterpart for the Rennen, was not designed to

23 The vamplate and Renntartsche, as well as other subsequently discussed elements of armour for the Rennen, may be seen in on a suit of armour made for Maximilian in Augsburg, c. 1494, by Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmied. See Appendix 1, Figure 23 (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Inv. No. R VI).

24 For extant examples, see Appendix 2, numbers 35, 38-41. 25 The bare hand of the knight beneath the vamplate may be seen in von Leitner, ed., Freydal,

plate 101. 26 See von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 90.

154

be separated from its bearer in a joust. This style of shield was made of wood and leather and

was fastened to the breastplate by means of a cord.27 It was squarer than the taller, longer

shape of the Renntartsche, as it needed to cover less surface area due to the more extensive body

armour worn in the Gestech.28 It was also notably concave, in order to better catch the

opponent’s lance and cause it to break.29

In the Rennen, the shield could take on different forms. Most commonly, as discussed

above, the shield worked in close conjunction with the vamplate. It was the knight’s other

primary form of chest defense rather than relying on a conventional breastplate. The

Renntartsche, as the shield is known, was uniquely shaped to cover the left side of the chest, the

left shoulder, the neck, and the lower face of the competitor. Indeed, it came all the way up to

meet the lower edge of the helmet, or Rennhut, thus also serving the purpose of a bevor. This

type of shield is seen most often in the Rennen, in forms such as the Schweif- or Scharfrennen.30

These larger Renntartsche might have a fabric covering, or they might have several smaller,

wedge-shaped pieces fitted over top, which could spring away from the main body of the

shield if struck. In addition, occasionally, as seen in the Scheibenrennen, a smaller, circular shield

was used.31 This disc-shaped shield also consisted of several wedge-shaped pieces, which, if

struck by an opponent’s lance, could spring away. This is what made shields used in most

forms of the Rennen unique; no matter their shape, they were frequenly attached to mechanical

27 These knotted ties are visible in von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 8. 28 The shield and other elements of the armour for the Gestech may be seen on an armour

produced for Sigismund of Tyrol in Innsbruck, c. 1483. See Appendix 1, Figure 24 (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Inv. No. S VII).

29 Nickel and Breiding, ‘A Book of Tournaments and Parades from Nuremberg’, pp. 128-29. 30 See Appendix 1, Figure 18. 31 See Appendix 1, Figure 17.

155

frames which allowed them to spring free. Such a device could aid in scorekeeping, as

mentioned above, but it would also have undeniably been a crowd pleasing effect.

4.2.c The Helmet

The helmet used in the Rennen was most commonly a one-piece sallet, known as a Rennhut.

These helmets are easily identifiable by the long, tapering tail at the back. They protected only

the upper half of the knight’s face, requiring the shield, often with a bevor underneath, to

come high above the knight’s chest and cover his lower face. The Rennhut extended down to

almost meet the top of this shield, extending below the wearer’s eyes; a narrow slit for vision

was cut into the helmet. Like the shield, the Rennhut could also include detachable elements

that would fly away if struck. These often took the form of two decorative fan-shaped plates

attached to the brow and secured by a pin.32

The style of helmet worn in the Gestech is known evocatively as a frog-mouth helm.

These large helms had evolved from the great helm for war but which were no longer used on

the battlefield at that time.33 They were fastened to the knight’s cuirass, thus preventing him

from turning his head but also helping to protect his neck and spine. A padded hood was also

worn underneath the frog-mouth helm in order to prevent the knight’s skull from dangerously

impacting the inside of the metal helmet in which he was firmly encased.34 This style of helm is

identifiable by its narrow vision slit on the top of the skull, above eye level, which meant that

the wearer would only be able to see ahead when leaning forward in the saddle. By raising his

32 See Appendix 1, Figure 23. 33 Dirk H. Breiding, ‘Some Notes on Great Helms, Crests and Early Tournament Reinforces’,

The Park Lane Arms Fair (2013), pp. 18-35. 34 A few of these hoods, known as Helmhauben, survive today. See Appendix 3, Number 43.

156

head at the moment before impact, he might avoid the dangers of splinters from the lance

entering his helmet, one of the most common forms of tournament injury.35

4.2.d The Harness

In addition to the lance/vamplate, shield, and helmet, the other key element of a knight’s

equipment in the German tournament was the harness, a discussion of which here will also

include leg defences. Maximilian’s 1519 Augsburg inventory includes nine Stechzeug, or armours

for the Gestech, and ten Rennezeug, or armours for the Rennen.

More extensive plate armour was often used in the Gestech when compared with the

Rennen. This could include a breastplate and upper and lower cannons to protect the arms, as

well as a gauntlet to protect the hand holding the reins.36 In both the Rennen and Gestech very

little protection was worn on the back. After all, this was an area which, in the joust, should

not technically be exposed to danger. Instead the emphasis on protection was entirely focused

on the front of the body.37 In the Rennen, the chest was primarily protected by the vamplate

and the Renntartsche, as discussed above. Beneath this was often worn a simple breastplate, or

frame, to which the Renntartsche was fastened. For the use of the ‘exploding’ elements of

armour, a Mechanische Brustück, or mechanical breastplate was used. These intricate devices

enabled the spring loaded shields to fly off of the wearer, and their complex designs denote an

impressive technological achievement in Maximilian’s tournaments.38 Such a concept, designed

to give the impression that a knight’s armour was being shattered from the force of the blow

35 Blair, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700, pp. 157-61. See Appendix 1, Figure 24. 36 See Appendix 1, Figure 24. 37 In the Rennen, the back was often protected by little more than an x-shaped frame. See

Appendix 1, Figure 25 (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Inv. No. B 174). 38 A few of these Mechanische Brustück survive today, including one made in Innsbruck, c. 1490,

for Maximilian. See Appendix 1, Figure 26 (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Inv. No. B 21).

157

he had received, represents perfectly the emphasis on spectacle to be found in Maximilian’s

tournaments and moves them still further away from any form of practical military exercise.

Two forms of leg defense were commonly utilised in the Rennen and Gestech. In both

categories of joust participants wear tassets, articulated leg defences which protected the upper

thigh.39 Alongside the tassets another form of leg armour used were dilgen. These were large,

concave metal plates which rested across the lower thighs and knees. They were attached to

each other by a leather strap and hung across the saddle. They were not fastened to man or

horse in any way, as they can often be seen becoming dislodged during combat.40

Finally, an additional element of a knight’s armour which was fastened to the harness

was the queue. This long metal hook fitted onto the frame of the cuirass and projected from a

knight’s back and acted as cradle into which the rear of the lance could rest. This would hold

the lance in place and help the knight to keep it steady while keeping it in position for jousting.

It was used in both the Rennen and the Gestech.41

4.3 Equestrian Armour

Finally, equestrian equipment served a crucial role in the joust as well.42 One type of saddle, the

Hohes Zeug, and its specialiased use in the Hohenzeuggestech, has already been discussed in

Chapter 3. The saddle customarily used in other forms of the joust was a much smaller and

39 See Appendix 1, Figure 23. 40 A good example of this is Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 29. 41 For examples, see von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 106, 113, 122. 42 For more on equestrian armour and the role of the horse in the tournament, see The Medieval

Horse and its Equipment: c. 1150–c. 1450, ed. by John Clark (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2004); Pia F. Cuneo, ‘(Un)Stable Identities: Hippology and the Professionalization of Scholarship and Horsemanship in Early Modern Germany’, in Early Modern Zoology: The Construction of Animals in Science, Literature and the Visual Arts, ed. by Karl A.E. Enenkel and Paul J. Smith (Leiden: Brill, 2007); and Caroll Gillmor, ‘Practical Chivalry: The Training of Horses for Tournaments and Warfare’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, 13 (1992), pp. 5-29.

158

more streamlined device made of wood and leather. The ease with which a competitor might

be pushed from his saddle is demonstrated in the multiple times knights are seen tumbling

from their mounts in Freydal.43 The saddles in such images are made of a uniform black leather,

with a low cantle in the rear and a ridge-shaped pommel in the front. They are without

decoration, although in some images minute gold fastenings or decorations are visible.44 Low-

hung stirrup leathers are attached to the saddles, allowing the knight’s legs to hang almost fully

extended, with small, open stirrups from which the knights ought to easily be able to free their

feet if they fall.45

Often in forms of the Gestech the saddle is used in conjuction with a Stechsack. These are

large padded textile elements which fit around the horses’ necks and shoulders. Also known as

Stechkissen, these devices protected the chests of the horses as well as the legs of their riders

and were often used in place of leg armour for the knights.46

The horses themselves did not wear extensive armour in the joust. Instead they were

normally covered in large textile caparisons (discussed in Chapter 5). In addition to being

visually pleasing, these caparisons often enclosed the eyes and ears of the horses, obscuring

their vision and inhibiting their hearing. Each horse would also often wear a ring of bells

around its upper-neck. The purpose of both these bells and the blind caparisons was to render

the horse unaware of another animal charging at it and to prevent it from deviating from its

43 See von Leitner, ed. Fredyal, plates 126, 129. Such images of riderless horses are particularly useful in that they provide a helpful, unhindered look at the saddles.

44 These may be seen in Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plates 31, 33. 45 Although this did not stop some from getting caught in their stirrups. See BSB, Cod. icon. 398,

plate 31. 46 Nickel and Breiding, ‘A Book of Tournaments and Parades from Nuremberg’, pp. 133-34.

Blair, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700, p. 161. For examples, see von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 110, 102.

159

course in the joust.47 In some instances horses might also wear shaffrons, or armoured head

defences, or more often simply a small round plate on the forehead which would have served a

decorative rather than a practical purpose.48 Unfortunately, in the images from the

Turnierbücher, the horses’ bridles are hidden under their caparisons, although the bits and reins

are visible. It is also impossible to tell if the horses are wearing more substantial shaffrons

underneath their caparisons, which would have offered them a bit more protection. In most

images the horses’ tails are tied up in an informal knot to keep them from dragging on the

ground or becoming entangled with knight or horse.49

4.4 Conclusions

Over the centuries, and in the fifteenth century in particular, the arms and armour worn in the

tournament changed drastically. It was no longer the same equipment worn by a knight on the

battlefield. Instead it had evolved into something unique. The armour for the late medieval

German tournament was extremely limited in its application; it had only one place where it

could be logically worn. These limitations could be even further narrowed when applied to the

Rennen and the Gestech, which each required tournament equipment unique to their forms.

During Maximilian’s lifetime, and due to the accomplishments of the highly skilled armourers

he kept in his employ, these suits of armour became not only practical tools but also works of

art. They were designed to protect their wearer under unique circumstances, to provide

protection only where most needed, and even to serve as part of the ‘show’. From head to toe

47 Blair, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700, pp. 185-57. 48 See Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 31, 25, 49. On some occasions, they might wear a

crinnet to protect the horse’s neck as well, as Maximilian’s own horse does in Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 398, plate 25.

49 See Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 27, 31.

160

the knight was equipped with gear designed to best suit the form of competition in which he

was participating, just as any modern athlete wears a uniform specifically designed for the

needs of their sport.

This development of tournament arms and armour further reveals the ways in which

the tournament had altered from its original purpose as a military exercise. Indeed, Hermann

Wiesflecker has said that, ‘Der Krieg war für ihn ein großes Turnier zur Verteilung der Welt’

(‘war was for him [Maximilian] a great tournament for the division of the world’).50 This idea

neatly sums up the way Maximilian saw his world. That battle was, to Maximilian, merely a

tournament on a grand scale illustrates the importance he placed on this athletic competition.

This sentiment also reverses the common conception of the tournament as practice for war. It

was instead, as Wiesflecker frames it, war which was merely a tournament writ large. And

Maximilian spent the time and energy in acquiring the equipment central to the tournament to

reflect this; the pursuit of victory in the lists was, to him, just as important as victory in the

field.

Just as the tournament inspired armour created especially for it, so to did it allow for

the production of a bounty of decorative elements and equipment. These features will be

discussed in the following chapter.

50 Hermann Wiesflecker, Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches, p. 63.

161

Tables 4 and 5: March 23, 1519 inventory of items from the Augsburg Harnischhaus, or

armour house, relating to tournaments.51

Item funf rennzewg zum anzug mit irer zugehör Five Rennzeug with all accompanying

elements

Item sechs stegzewg, Tewtsch und Welsch zu

brauchen Six Stechzeug for the Deutsch- and Welschgestech

Item zwen Welsch stechzewg, recht nach Welscher

art gemacht

Two Stechzeug for the Welschgestech made in

the non-German (Italian or Burgundian?)

style

Item mer zwen geschift rennzewg, damit man

viererlai rennen thuen mag

Two more Geschift Rennzeug (presumably for

the Geschiftrennen), from which one can make

four more suits

Item drew krippen zw dem buntwerk und haben die

zwu krippen kain galgen

Three Krippen for the harness, and two have

no hanging mechanism

Item ain renn- und ain stechzewg, die baid haben

auf kais. maj. leib gehört

One Renn- and one Stechzeug, both of which

belonged to his Imperial Majesty

(Maximilian)

Item zehen bar straiftartschen Ten undecorated Streiftartschen

Item drewzehen kerbeisen Thirteen lance-heads

Item newnzehen swebscheiben zum Tewtschen und

Welschen gestech

Nineteen shields/vamplates(?) for the

Deutsch- and Welschgestech

Item ainundzwainzig swebscheiben zum thur(n)ir Twenty-one shields/vamplates(?) for the

tournament

Item drew bar ubrig scheiben zum stechen Three undecorated spare shields/discs(?) for

the Gestech

Item zehen becher an die stangen Ten vamplates

Item sechzehen prechscheiben zum rennen Sixteen Brechscheiben for the Rennen

51 ‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus- Hof- und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, ed. by Heinrich Zimerman, in Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses, vol. 3, 2 (1885), no. 2955, pp. 82-84.

162

Item achtundzwainzig prechscheiben zum stechen Twenty-eight Brechscheiben for the Gestech

Item vierundfierzig renneisen, gros und clain Forty-four lances-heads for the Rennen, big

and small

Item ainsunddreisig krondlen zum Tewtschen gestech Thirty-one coronel lance-heads for the

Deutschgestech

Item newnunddreisig krondlen zum Welschen

gestech

Thirty-nine coronel lance-heads for the

Welschgestech

Item acht tartschen zum anzug Eight shields to suit (i.e. multi-purpose?)

Item zehen straiftartschen Ten Streiftartschen

Item sechzehen schilt zum Welschen gestech Sixteen shields for the Welschgestech

Item dreizehen schilt zum Tewtschen gestech Thirteen shields for the Deutschgestech

Item drei übrig hinderhacken Three spare queues

Item ain stechdaczen One Stechtaschen(?), or possibly Stechstange

(lance for the Gestech)

Item newnunddreissig spieseisen zum thur(n)ir Thirty-nine lance-heads for the tournament

Item drew ganze buntwerch zum rennen Three whole harnesses (?) for the Rennen

Mer sechs halbe büntwerk Six more half-harnesses

Item siben swaif Seven queues(?)

Item ain alte kripp zum büntwerch One old Kripp for a harness

Item zweif zawm und drew piss Two bridles and three hooks

Item ailf plent Eleven plates(?)

Item ain stechwames One gambeson (possibly for the Gestech?)

Item achzehen strwpf, bös und gut Eighteen straps(?), poor and good (quality)

Item vier stiel zum anlegen Four (lance) shafts to suit

Item zwai bar diechhalftern zum Tewtschen gestech Two undecorated half-greaves for the

Deutschgestech

Item dreizehen stripf; die newn seind liderin, vier von

garn und drew ubrig gewindt

Thirteen straps; nine are leather, four of

textile and three of leftover threads

Item zwen alt geschift rennzeug mit iren zugehörung

on geruscht

Two old Rennzeug for the Geschiftrennen with

their accompanying elements

163

Item zwai helmlet mit iren schiftungen zum

Welschen rennen Two helms with their (?) for the Welschrennen

Item zwu geschift spalacz, zw demselben rennen

gehörig Two (?), belonging to the same Rennen

Item zwai blat zwm geschiften rennen Two plates for the Geschiftrennen

Item zwai kerbeisen zum rennen Two lance heads for the Rennen

Item vier bar alter paingewand Four undecorated old leg armours (? -

possibly for the Gestech im Beinharnisch)

Item ain baingewand mit flamen One leg armour with flames

Item ain alt rucken und krebs; hat meister Caspar

gemacht

One old back and tassets; which master

Caspar made (most likely Caspar Rieder)

Item […] zwai alte thur(n)ierschwert Two old tournament swords

Item sechsundfierzig stangen mit krönlen und

krampen und sieben mit krampen zum Wellschen

gestech

Forty-six lances with coronel heads and (? –

possibly hooked heads) and seven with (? –

possibly hooked heads) for the Welschgestech

Item zehen scheft zum tur(n)iren Ten shafts (i.e. lances) for the tournament

Item ain grossen vergülten Welschen spies; ist im

slahen gewesen Herzog Karls von Burgundj, hat

Jheronimus Fennd kais. maj. geschenk

A large gilded Welsch lance; which was with

Duke Charles of Burgundy in battle, (and

which) Jheronimus Fennd gave to his

Imperial Majesty

Item sibenundsechzig renneisen, Tewtsch und

Welsch, und 47 eisen zum thur(n)ir und Welschem

gestech. Mer 40 kröndel zum Tewtschen gestech und

32 kröndel zum Welschen gestech, tut 186 eisen

Sixty-seven Renn- lance-heads, Deutsch and

Welsch, and forty-seven lance-heads for the

tournament and the Welschgestech. Forty more

coronel lance-heads for the Deutschgestech and

thirty-two coronel lance-heads for the

Welschgestech, totalling 186 lance-heads.

Item sechzehen prechscheiben zum rennen und 27

zum Tewtschn gestech, tuet 43 prechscheiben

Sixteen Brechscheiben for the Rennen and

twenty-seven for the Deutschgestech, totalling

forty-three Brechscheiben

Item vier stechwames Four gambesons (possibly for the Gestech?)

Table 4: Tournament Arms and Armour in the 1519 Augsburg Inventory

164

Item acht stechstirnen Eight shaffrons for the Gestech

Item ain stirnen zum alten Welschen gestech One shaffron for the old Welschgestech

Item acht geleit mit schellen Eight bell collars (for horses)

Item ain scheiben mit ainem adler auf ain rosstirnen One disc (decorated) with an eagle on a

shaffron

Item zwenundfierzig sättel zum stechen und rennen Forty-two saddles for the Gestech and the

Rennen

Item sechs stechseck Six Stechsäcke

Item vierzehen liderin rossgurt Fourteen leather horse girths

Item vierzehen pruech auf die ross zum decken,

darauf zw machen

Fourteen bards/caparisons(?) to put on a

horse

Item funfzehen bar stegraif Fifteen undecorated stirrups

Item zwen beslagen sättel zum geschiften rennen Two saddles for the Geschiftrennen with metal

fittings

Item sechs gross gurt von garn zum geschiften rennen Six large textile girths for the Geschiftrennen

Item zweif gurt von garn, gros und clain Two textile girths, large and small

Item zwo ganz vergült stirnen Two entirely gilded shaffrons

Item zwu gross stirnen mit getterten augen Two large shaffrons with blinded eyes

Item funf halbstirnen Five half-shaffrons

Item zwu messig stirnen Two massive shaffrons

Item sechs sättel zum Welschen gestech mit ir

zugehörung

Six saddles for the Welschgestech with all their

accompanying elements

Item ain sattel mit schwarzen diehling zum

sweingaid One saddle with black dilgens for (?)

Item zwen sättel mit bolierten straiftartschen und

ain mit schwarzen straiftartschen

Two saddles with polished Streiftartschen and

one with black Streiftartschen

Item zwai bar alt stechachsen und ain stirnen; seind

nit guet

Two undecorated old Stechsäcke and one

shaffron; they are not good

165

Item zwen alt beslaten sättel zw dem Welschen

gestech oder rennen und etlich bar sporen

Two old (?) saddles for the Welschgestech or

Welschrennen and several undecorated spurs

Sättl: Item rennsattel, acht stechsätel, 22 sticzsatel,

zwelf alt rennsättel, vier sätel zw den geschiften

zewgen, drei sattel zw dem lustrennen und

knabensattelen drei, bring in summa aller sättel 56

sätel

Saddles: (One) saddle for the Rennen, eight

saddles for the Gestech, twenty-two (?)-

saddles, twelve old saddles for the Rennen,

four saddles for the Geschift armour, three

saddles for the recreational Rennen (possibly

the Gesellenrennen), and three boy’s saddles,

bringing the total to fifty-six saddles in all

Item stegraif sibenzehen par Seventeen pairs of stirrups

Item sechsundzwainzig renn- und stechgürt Twenty-six girths for the Rennen and the

Gestech

Item dreizehen stupfgürt Thirteen (?)-girths

Item ailf gürt zum gestech über die schranken Eleven girths for the Gestech over the tilt

Item zwen schwaifgürt Two Schwaif- girths

Item zwen gurt mit schnieren Two girths with ties

Item fwnfzehen pruech auf die pfard zum gestech Fifteen bards/caparisons (?) for the horse for

the Gestech

Item sechzehen plent zun rossen Sixteen plates(?) for horses

Item zehen stechseck Ten Stechsäcke

Table 5: Equestrian Armour in the 1519 Augsburg Inventory

166

Chapter 5: Tournament Equipment – Decorative

5.1 Introduction

As the tournament evolved over the centuries, it became more and more spectator-friendly.

Unlike its earlier incarnations as a mêlée, which might have ranged for miles across the

countryside, these tournaments brought the audience into the competition space as a vital

participant. Earlier tournaments were far more for the benefit of the combatants than for

anyone watching. Yet as the tournament shrank in range, soon being held in the confined

arenas which became known as lists, it grew in popularity – and feasibility – as a spectator

sport. In addition, the rise in popularity of the individual joust between just two competitors

also meant that a knight might spend more time and effort on his tournament ensemble. As a

spectator sport, the tournament offered a unique opportunity for knights to show off a

previously un-utilised range of decorative elements to the crowds and to their peers in a way

they never could on the battlefield.

As a counterpoint to the previous chapter on tournament arms and armour, this

chapter will examine the decorative elements of tournament equipment. Illustrating how the

rich and colourful fabrics which the knights and their horses wore at tournament will

demonstrate both how they added to the atmosphere of opulence and showmanship and also

how they promoted certain themes and chivalric ideals through their distinct designs and

functions, which were different from any which had come before. For what is not clear

through a study of the arms and armour alone is how vibrant this armour would have been at

tournament through the aid of various textiles. It could be both practical and ornamental. The

mechanical elements discussed in Chapter 4 are just some of the ways in which the armour was

meant to lend a sense of theatricality to the tournament. However, this was greatly aided by the

167

textile elements of a tournament. This chapter will discuss the myriad ways in which a knight

might feature textiles in the joust and the methods by which this was done.1

In fact, the knight at the joust was blessed with several surfaces on which he could add

some element of decoration, and this chapter will endeavour to touch on each. Some of these

items were both decorative and functional, serving as decoration as well as arms or armour,

such as the lance and the shield. There are also items which were made to be purely decorative

and served no protective function, i.e. the caparison and the crest. As will be seen, however,

these could also serve multiple roles in a tournament setting, adding to the competition in

some vital way. Finally, this chapter will also look at some examples of decoration in the lists.

The use of textiles to add interest or excitement was not limited to the knight and his horse,

after all. Instead, items like tents and the garb of attendents also offer examples of textiles and

colourful decoration playing an integral role.

At first glance, the imagery presented on these decorative elements might be taken for

a form of heraldry. However, it should be definitively stated that this is not the case, as the

imagery on the items such as the caparisons or the shields expanded beyond the rules of

traditional heraldric patterns, which were strictly limited in the colours, patterns, and images

that could be used, in what combinations, and how they lay on each other.2 The decorative

imagery featured in Maximilian’s tournaments does not come close to following these rules.

For one, the range of designs, both animal and human, are far more naturalistic than those

found on coats-of-arms. The colours and pictures are far too complex. Crucially, the text

1 One brief but useful study of German courtly textiles, including in tournament context, is Max Tewes, ‘ain varib, darein wir uns und unser hofgesind beclaiden: Hofkleider der bayerischen Herzöge an der Wende zur Neuzeit’, in Ritterwelten im Spätmittelalter: Höfisch-ritterliche Kultur der Reichen Herzöge von Bayern-Landshut, pp. 33-47.

2 These are summarised in Keen, Chivalry, pp. 125-42.

168

included is also always written in German, marking these designs out as exclusively culturally

German. Also competitors who appear more than once within a single tournament, such as

Maximilian himself on many occasions, never appear with the same trappings twice; rather

their costume changes with each joust, implying that they are not competing under a specific

coat-of-arms but instead are looking for the chance to show off as many different ensembles

as possible.3 These colourful displays were designed exclusively for use in a tournament setting,

where they might be appreciated as symbols of status.4

In addition to their distinctness from the realm of heraldic studies, the use of imagery

in tournaments, particularly those held in Maximilian’s time, should also be held as apart from

the field of emblem and impresa studies.5 While this has been touched on briefly in wider

scholarship, the depths of tournament imagery in connection to emblems is far from fully

explored. Alan Young has made the greatest effort, although his focus falls primarily on

Elizabethan tournaments. Young attempts to draw attention to the interest and significance of

the various ways ‘emblems’ or ‘impresa’ might be employed in a tournament setting, yet in

trying to cover such a broad chronological and geographical span in such a short space, he

does not come to any satisfactory conclusions. Furthermore, some of the so-called problems

which Young points to in interpreting tournament emblems may be often easily refuted when

studying Maximilian’s tournaments. Young claims that it is not always possible to identify the

3 For evidence of this, see Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 26 and 32, where Maximilian appears twice in the context of the same tournament but in different apparel.

4 In Bloodied Banners: Martial Displays on the Medieval Battlefield (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2010), Robert Jones discusses the symbolism of heraldic display on the battlefield. The idea of such display, particularly on textiles, as socio-cultural tool for showing martial prowess (pp. 33-55) could also be applied, in many respects, to the tournament.

5 These were devices usually consisting of a picture (which, according to official guidelines, ought not to include a human figure) and a short motto or phrase which could appear in a variety of settings, including portraits, embroidery, or even tournaments. They were often recorded in collections known as emblem books.

169

bearer of an impresa, or the specific tournament at which it was worn, and he also points to

difficulty in interpreting the language, symbolism, etc. of an impresa. Each of these obstacles is

easily surmounted when examining the wealth of imagery and accompanying explanatory text

prevalent in many German Turnierbücher.6

5.2 The Caparison

The largest and best canvas by far for a knight in the tournament was, in fact, his horse.7

During a joust the side of one’s horse was fully displayed to the audience, and by covering this

entire surface in fabric, known as a caparison, a knight was gifted with a wonderfully large area

with which to play in terms of colour and design. While revealing many things about the spirit

of the tournament, it should also be pointed out that the caparisons also concealed much. For

example, the girth, which held the saddle on the horse, and the bridle, on the horse’s head,

remain hidden under the caparison except for the bit visible in the horse’s mouth. The saddle

was secured on top of the caparison, and the girth was likely attached through a slit in the

fabric and passed beneath the horse’s belly in that way.8 Even the reins were usually draped

with matching fabric to the caparison. This created a pleasing uniformity of smooth, unbroken

lines for the look of the knight and his horse, yet it also prevents modern viewers from having

an unobstructed view of the equestrian tack beneath the decorative elements.

6 Alan R. Young, ‘The Emblem in Tournaments’, in Companion to Emblem Studies, ed. by Peter Daly (New York: AMS Press, 2008), pp. 477-87. Young largely disregards the world of German tournaments in his work. Interestingly, he does state that extensive records of a large number of tournament emblems/impresa have survived, and topping his list are the Turnierbücher of Wilhelm IV of Bavaria and that of the Electors of Saxony, yet any further description or discussion of these works is oddly excluded from Young’s chapter, pp. 485-86.

7 Jones touches briefly on the significance of the horse’s decorative function in battle in Bloodied Baners, pp. 139-44.

8 For more on the practical fit of the caparison, see Karen Watts, ‘Taken for a Ride? The Case for a Unique Surviving Leather Horse Bard of Henry VIII’, unpublished conference proceedings: ‘Leather in Warfare’, (Royal Armouries, Leeds, November 2014), pp. 74-88

170

In spite of this, the fabric of the caparison itself also served a practical purpose in many

ways. The best example of this is that, in the majority of tournament images, the caparisons are

‘blind’, or have no eye-holes, completely obscuring the horse’s vision.9 This was to prevent

them from seeing the other horse charging at them, which would have caused them to swerve

out of the way, serving the same function as the circlet of bells discussed in Chapter 4.10 The

caparison could also be altered to work with whatever form of equestrian equipment was

needed for a specific joust. When a Stechsack (discussed in Chapter 4) was used, for instance,

the caparison was split into two separate parts in order to conceal the Stechsack while retaining

a sense of stylishness.11 In terms of the decorative elements of tournament equipment, the

caparison is perhaps the most versatile, multifunctional, and attention grabbing.

It is on these caparisons that some of the most fantastic decorative tournament

elements are to be found. Particularly on the stage of the individual joust, these caparisons

came to play a far more vital role through their eye-catching designs, becoming in many ways

the central part of a knight’s tournament dress. While some were solid, bi-coloured, or striped,

many displayed elaborate images or phrases across the horse’s flanks. These caparisons offer

up numerous magnificent examples of the role textiles played in the tournaments of

Maximilian’s era. This chapter will look at a few of the most interesting examples and their

significance, although their production, symbolism, and importance, warrants further study,

the scope of which is larger than this thesis chapter.

9 Examples of this type of caparison may be seen in Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, Cod.icon 403, and Cgm 1930, as well as in Freydal, and the Turnierbücher of Gasper Lamberger, Wilhelm IV, and Johann of Saxony.

10 Blair, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700, pp. 185-87. 11 For examples, see Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod.icon 398, plates 56, 74, 76, 78, 80,

82; Cod.icon 403, plate 11; and Cgm 1930, plates 5-16.

171

One possible explanation for the significance of some of these designs is that they

might be personal devices or symbols associated with an individual, such as the Tudor rose of

Henry VII and his descendents or the white hart of Richard II, rather than a coat-of-arms.

One potential corroboration of this theory may be found in the figure of Gasper Lamberger, a

nobleman from modern Slovenia and a frequent participant in Maximilian’s tournaments.

Lamberger often appears in the joust with what appears to be a porcupine (or possibly a

hedgehog) on his caparisons.12 This animal is always accompanied by two interlocking gold

‘C’s, which on one occasion are topped with a crown, and are also often presented with a red

heart.13 Although not a coat-of-arms as such, this would have been a way for both the audience

and his fellow competitors to recognise Lamberger in a tournament.14

Other caparisons often featured visual references which the fellow knights in the lists

and spectators in the stands would have understood instantly. In Hans Burgkmair the

Younger’s edition of the Triumphzug tournament prints, one of the knights in the Deutschgestech

(there referred to as Das Deutsch gemein Gestech) uses a caparison showing a cherubic child figure

riding a hobby horse and holding what looks like a little windmill on a stick in the style of a

lance.15 This was, in fact, a common training tool for young boys when they were first learning

to ride and to joust. Before they could hold a proper lance, children would run around holding

these toys, and the end would spin around in the wind, turning the practice into a fun game for

them. The same toy can also be seen in the margins of Maximilian’s own personal book of

12 See Appendix 1, Figure 27. 13 This unique emblem can be seen in Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod.icon 398, plate

24, and in The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, pp. 52, 66, and 67. 14 This is the closest example in a German tournament context which I have found with

similarity to the emblem, but it seems to be unique to Lamberger. 15 See Appendix 1, Figure 28. Pallmann, ed., Hans Burgkmair des Jüngeren: Turnierbuch von 1529,

plate 6. The same tool is also represented in three-dimensions on the knight’s crest, where it likely would have spun around when he rode.

172

hours, where two boys face off against each other while bearing the windmill training lances

and round shields.16 In Burgmkair’s print, this same childhood toy is now a part of the grown

man’s tournament garb, where it would have been immediately recognisable to his fellow

jousters. Also written on a banner next to the cherub is the ENHG phrase Das freut mich, or ‘It

pleases me’, meant in the sense of ‘I enjoy this’. The knight is expressing his continued love of

the joust from his youth training with a toy to his adulthood competing in proper tournaments.

Another common feature of these caparisons is allegorical imagery or visual puns. One

particularly clever one comes from the Turnierbuch of Wilhelm IV, which depicts a joust held in

1512. In this instance the caparison of Wilhelm, on the left, is decorated with rows of hanging

keys. The caparison of his opponent, on the right, on the other hand, is decorated with rows of

locks.17 Coordination like this would have required agreement and cooperation beforehand

between the two knights. It is another example of the changes in the tournament over time.

Although the two opponents are still competing against each other in a contest of military skill,

they are also working together to create a pleasing visual display for their audience.

Wilhelm IV’s Turnierbuch is filled with this sort of allegorical imagery. And many of

these pictorial messages often have to do with love. In another joust Wilhelm’s shield and

caparison feature copious small red hearts which are either being crushed in vices or squeezed

in clamps hanging from chains. The words Lieb geduldig (‘patient love’ or ‘love patiently’) are

also visible on a banner trailing across his horse’s back.18 And again later Wilhelm appears as

literally a ‘prisoner of love’, as his vibrant red caparison depicts men in chains and stocks while

16 The Book of Hours of the Emperor Maximilian the First, ed. by Walter L. Strauss (New York: Abaris Books Inc., 1974), p. 298, folio 149v.

17 Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, plate 10. See Appendix 1, Figure 29.

18 Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, plate 11.

173

hearts in fools caps doubling as wings float above them.19 These are not subtle messages but

rather loud declarations of one’s noble intentions and values in the setting of the tournament,

the perfect place for showing off a chivalric code of conduct.

The imagery of love, and particularly hearts, is something which is markedly prevalent

in the designs of the caparisons. And a study of the various German tournament books reveals

a wealth of other common themes and repeated images. Besides hearts, these include locks,

anchors, clasped hands, crowns, owls and other animals, and human figures, all of which

appear in abundance.20 The reasoning behind each of these recurrent images in all their varying

forms makes perfect sense when viewed in the context of a tournament. In particular those

representative of love or steadfast faithfulness, such as the hearts or female figures or clasped

hands, fit well with the ethos of the tournament and its connection to the chivalric code. They

reflect the age-old idea of the noble knight jousting for the love of his lady, who may have

been looking on.21

In addition to pictures, text or individual letters also often features as the central design

element on a caparison. Sometimes they are nothing more than a series of letters, most likely

an abbreviation for something, or even a single letter or two interlocking letters.22 Sometimes

they are aspirational phrases or inspirational mottos or even crude or silly jokes. One

particularly interesting example of this may be found in BSB, Cod.icon 398.23 In an image of a

19 Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, plate 12. 20 In Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398 alone: for crowns, see plates 16, 22, 24, 34, 40; for human

figures, see plates 24, 40, 42, 52, 70; for animals, see plate 24; for hearts, see plates 40, 70; for clasped hands, see plates 42, 52, 72; for anchors, see plates 50.

21 The joust, after all, had a long-standing tradition in chivalric songs and literature and was endowed with a heavy dose of romance ‘in which colour and violence fuse together into the display of the male before the female,’ Keen, Chivalry, p. 92.

22 For examples of these, see Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 16, 22, 24, 28, 34, 38, 50, 64, 70, and 80.

23 See Appendix 1, Figure 30.

174

joust from a tournament which took place in Nuremburg in 1491, two men compete in a

Scharfrennen. They are labelled as the margrave Friedrich of Brandenburg on the right and, on

the left, his opponent is labelled in ENHG as desr Margraven diener (‘this margrave’s servant’).24

This sets up the intriguing scenario that the margrave is jousting against his servant, or possibly

his squire. The margrave’s caparison is decorated with a row of clasped hands along the

bottom edge, each pair of which holds a sprig of greenery. On his horse’s flank is a woman

and a wildman and, above them, a banner bearing the phrase Erken dich selb, or ‘know yourself’.

On the left the servant’s much plainer caparison features a banner declaring Ich wart der Zeit or,

‘I am waiting for the time’.25 Although the servant’s caparison is simpler, its only decoration

being the single phrase, both his and the margrave’s are the same striking shade of red. The

servant’s caparison seems to declare his noble aspirations; he is perhaps ‘waiting for the time’

when he, too, can compete in the tournament as a noble, while the margrave’s caparison

expresses a statement of self-assurance.

Yet the caparison was not always a canvas for two-dimensional decoration. In many

cases, the fabric of the caparison itself could be manipulated to add even more visual interest,

or it could simply be a secondary element meant to support some other three-dimensional

decoration. Some interesting examples of this come from Gasper Lamberger’s Turnierbuch. On

one occasion the plain black caparison of Lamberger’s opponent has had a multitude of cuts

made in it. These form triangular flaps which would have provided an interesting effect of

movement when the knight rode into the joust. In this image they are clearly visible falling

24 Margrave Friedrich V of Brandenburg (1460-1536) was the son of Elector of Brandenburg Albrecht Achilles and Anna, daughter of Elector Friedrich II of Saxony. He was married to princess Sophia of Poland, daughter of King Kasimir IV of Poland. Due to his lavish lifestyle and accompanying debts, he was forced to abdicate by his sons Kasimir and Georg in 1515 and held captive for thirteen years. He was also said to have demonstrated signs of mental instability.

25 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 52.

175

open as the horse and rider fall to the ground.26 On another occasion Lamberger’s entire

caparison, as well as his shield and sleeves, have been covered in bells.27 The caparison has

further been cut into six distinct panels at the bottom in order to lend even more movement to

it. In such an ensemble Lamberger would have made a terrific noise as he charged toward his

opponent.28

Finally, Lamberger also proved that a substantial caparison was not always a necessity.

At one point in his Turnierbuch his horse is depicted wearing only a minimal harness of straps

covered in small, round, undecorated pots. Lamberger’s clothes and shield are covered in the

same pots, and he wears one as a crest on his helmet.29 While the exact purpose of these pots is

unclear, it is tempting to imagine they were filled some sort of liquid and were made to

demonstrate Lamberger’s steadiness and skill in the joust. No matter what form they took, all

of these manipulations of the caparison, however, would have been additional ways for a

knight to draw attention to himself in the tournament – a way to stand out among his fellow

competitors.

26 The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, p. 38. 27 The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, p. 26. 28 While this image is unusual among German Turnierbücher, the decoration of bells covering a

caparison may also be found in Benoît de Sainte-Maure's Le Roman de Troie (c. 1165), at the point where Benoît is describing the arming of Penthesilea, the queen of the Amazons: En un cheval d'Espaigne bei/ Plus grant, plus fort e plus vaillant/ D'autres chevaus e plus corant/ Est montee delivrement/ Pleine d'ire e de mal talent/ Coverz fu toz d'un drap de seie/ Qui plus qui flor de lis blancheie/ Cent eschilletes cler sonan/ Petites, d'or, non mie granz/ I atachent... (ll. 23440-49 in Baumgartner and Veillard, eds, Livre de Poche, 1998): ‘On a bay Spanish horse/ That was bigger, strong and more valiant/ Than all other horses, as well as being faster/ [Penthesilea] is mounted/ [She is] full of anger and resentment/ [Her horse] was covered with a silk caparison/ That was whiter than a lily/ One hundred bells that rang clearly/ Small, made of gold, not large/ Were attached to it...’ (translation by Sophie Harwood, 2016). This description is also given of Penthesilea in the Histoire ancienne jusqu'à César that was based in part on the Troie and written around 1220.

29 The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, p. 55.

176

5.3 The Lance

In the tournament, the lance held a place of central importance as the primary weapon – the

means by which a knight won or lost a joust. Its significanc as such has been discussed in the

previous chapter. However, in Maximilian’s time this martial primacy did not exempt the lance

from serving a decorative purpose as well. Like the shield (discussed in section 5.4) its role was

multi-purpose and reflects the importance of aesthetics in the German tournament. For,

although it might seem a minor instrument of the tournament to embellish compared with the

other tools with which a knight was endowed, in particular the caparison or the crest (to be

discussed later), participants still found a way to make the lance stand out. Indeed, this is

logical considering that, despite all the added spectacular elements, the lance remained the

central point (so to speak) of the joust.

The best form of evidence which remains for observing the physical appearance of the

lance in the tournament is the Turnierbücher of Maximilian’s reign, where this ‘beautifying’ of

the lance can be seen to have been carried out in several different ways. One of the most

common methods appears to have been simply wrapping or draping the lance in fabric. For

example, in Hans Burgkmair the Younger’s edition of the Triumphzug tournament prints, two

knights appear with their lances wrapped entirely in fabric, so that no wood is visible, to match

their caparisons. One is purple with a pattern of stars, and one is red with a pattern of what

look like bees.30 This matching of textiles and patterns is a common theme in tournament

decoration.31 Such thoughtful presentation emphasises the eye for detail which the participants

brought to these events. The result it creates is pleasing to the witness, whether they be the

firsthand viewers or those who see the effect memorialised in print form.

30 von Hefner, ed., Hans Burgkmaiers Turnier-Buch, plate 10. 31 For further examples of this trend, see Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 40, 42, 44.

177

Lances were, however, not always decorated to match the caparison. Independent

embellishments also were experimented with. The Turnierbuch of Wilhelm IV of Bavaria

illustrates a wide range of lance decorations. On one occasion Duke Wilhelm’s lance is artfully

draped in a loose gauze-like fabric gathered into bunches.32 On another the duke’s lance

features two rows of small rosettes running its entire length.33 Also popular was adorning the

tip of one’s lance with a hanging element. These might include tassles, bells, or more unusual

items.34 Finally, one of the most common decorations for the lance was to swathe it in

feathers, often dyed a multitude of colours, wrapping them around the entirety of the shaft of

the lance.35 This trend – the use of feathers – echoes the most common fallback theme for the

crest, when no more intricate adornment was used.

Of course, broadening the definition of ‘decoration’, the lance was not always merely

enhanced with simple textiles or feathers. Occasionally the lance itself was a sort of stage, a

platform for showing off one’s skill in the joust. Some very unusual examples of this remain

today. In the Turnierbuch of Marx Walther, Walther appears at one point with a small boy sitting

astride his lance close to the base.36 The child is dressed in colours to complement Walther’s

crest, shield, and caparison and wears a cloth hat with a feather. He himself is not wearing any

element of protective armour.37 Whether or not Walther truly took part in a joust with a child

32 Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, plate 1. 33 Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, plate 12. 34 For example, Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398 features tassles on plates 50 and 58. Munich, BSB,

Cgm 1930 offers examples of a bag (plate 25), a shoe (plate 26), a plaque featuring clasped hands (plate 27), what appears to be a gold necklace (plate 28), a bell (plate 29), and a star (plate 42).

35 For examples, see Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 72; Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 403, plate 11; Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, plate 6.

36 Munich, BSB, Cgm 1930, plate 43. This instance of a knight not being alone on horseback in a tournament is not unique. In the same Turnierbuch, Walther appears with a monkey sitting on the flanks of the horse and tethered to the saddle by a chain (plate 34). Again, whether this is apocryphal or truly took place is questionable, but, regardless, it serves as a demonstration of Walther’s skill by implying that he would be able to joust whilst also contending with a monkey.

37 See Appendix 1, Figure 31.

178

sitting on his lance is unknown and more than likely improbable. Yet such an image would

represent to viewers Walther’s physical prowess and skill in the joust. He is demonstrating that

not only does he have the strength to support a heavy additional weight on his lance but also

the ability to hold his lance so steady that a small child could safely ride upon it.

All of this comes back, once more, to the arms and armour of the tournament and the

lance’s dual role. Like the fabric-draped shields (see Section 5.4, below), these embellished

lances illustrate the unique blending of pageantry textiles and arms and armour found in a

tournament of Maximilian’s time. The two exist in a harmonious display of metal and cloth –

of military might and of showmanship. The fact that the tournament armour was designed to

work in harmony with the fabric elements shows that they were not a mere afterthought but an

integral part of the overall experience.

5.4 The Shield

One obvious area which lent itself well to decoration in the tournament was the wide, flat

surface of the knight’s shield. The role of the shield as a piece of practical tournament

equipment has already been discussed in the previous chapter. Like the lance, the shield served

both a practical and a decorative function. But its parallel role as a central decorative element

in the tournament should not be overlooked, since, as discussed above, German tournament

imagery was not bound by the traditional rules of heraldry. This may be clearly seen in the wide

range of tournament adornment and imagery found in manuscripts such as the Turnierbücher.

This separation of heraldric from tournament imagery is further emphasised by the shape of

the shield in the German tournament. Originally official coats-of-arms were designed to fit

onto a traditional, escutcheon-shaped shield (essentially an inverse triangle with convex long

179

sides).38 However, the shields used in the late medieval German joust had evolved into

different shapes not conducive to traditional heraldic imagery but rather conducive to their

assigned purpose in the context of whatever form of joust was being practiced. This allowed

for the possibility of a wholly different style of decoration. During Maximilian’s reign the

shield was utilised to its full extent as another place to show off opulent colours and imagery.

Looking at the variety of shapes, sizes, and materials for the tournament shield

discussed in Chapter 4, it is easy to see how the shield had evolved by Maximilian’s time to

become specifically suited to the joust in all its forms. Thus the shields which we see in images

from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, such as those in Chapter 4, are not emblazoned

with family crests or coats-of-arms but rather are made almost always to match the larger

pattern or image on the horse’s caparison (discussed above). This theme of the separation of

heraldic from tournament imagery in the decorative components of Maximilian’s tournaments

is one which runs across all the various elements. Such complete separation of heraldic

patterns from tournament imagery is decidedly shown in the Turnierbuch of Wilhelm IV. In

each illustration in this work the jousting knight appears with his familial coat-of-arms drawn

above him, free-standing, and it is always different from whatever elaborate imagery appears

on his shield. Duke Wilhelm, for example, appears in numerous different garbs, but his coat-

of-arms, the blue and white checks of Bavaria, are always drawn above him and always the

same, allowing him to be identified.39

38 Keen, Chivalry, p. 126. The difficulty of placing the coats-of-arms of German nobility on tournament shields would be futher exacerbated by the fact that, by the fifteenth century, many noble families’ coats-of-arms were made up of, in fact, many coats-of-arms which had been incorporated over the generations as wealthy families married together. This process resulted in an achievement subdivided in many parts, each of which was often highly detailed and would have been incredibly difficult to replicate on the surface of a tournament shield.

39 See Appendix 1, Figure 26. All of the images in Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545 demonstrate this.

180

The most common form which the decoration of the tournament shield took was to

match the design of the horse’s caparison. In instances where the caparison featured a large,

central design on the horse’s flanks, this design might be replicated in miniature on the knight’s

shield. For example, in BSB, Cod.icon 398, in an illustration of Maximilian jousting, the

emperor bears a single inverted anchor on his caparison, which appears in an identical form on

his shield.40 Or, in cases where the caparison was decorated all over in a repeating pattern or

motif, this same pattern might appear again on the shield. An example of this may be seen in

BSB, Cod.icon 403, in the image of the Wulstrennen, where the knight furthest from the viewer

bears a shield with a pattern of small gold stars on a solid red background. This same pattern is

replicated in a larger scale on the horse’s caparison.41 Finally, in instances where the caparison

is made of one or two solid colours, this same colour or colours would also feature on the

shield. This simpler design can be seen many times in Freydal, where stripes of two or three

colours are a popular pattern on caparison and shield.42

The colours that can be seen on this range of shields are, in fact, representations of a

fabric covering, highlighting once more the importance of textiles to the tournament. These

designs were not painted on to the surface of the shield; instead the method of embellishing

the shields appears to have been to adhere a fabric covering to the front of the shield. In many

illustrations of the joust excess fabric can be clearly seen hanging off the edge of the shield, its

40 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 50. For further examples, see Munich, BSB Cod.icon 398, plates 16, 40, 42; The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, pp. 12, 33, 41, 46; Munich, BSB Cod.icon 403, plates

41 Munich, BSB Cod.icon 403, plate 25. For further examples, see Munich, BSB Cod.icon 403, plates 13, 17, 29; Munich, BSB Cod.icon 398, plate 26, 30, 46; von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 61, 73, 74.

42 von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 49, 50, 54, 58, and 61 are just some examples. For further examples, see Munich, BSB Cod.icon 398, plates 16, 18, 46, 54; The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, pp. 3, 7, 14; Munich, BSB Cod.icon 403, plates 9,

181

soft and malleable state evident as it ripples and flutters.43 This technique represents again, as

with the textile enhancement of the lance, a harmonious combination of the armour of the

tournament and the textiles that went along with it.44

5.5 The Crest

Another place where a knight could make his fashionable mark in the lists was the top of the

helmet, where a crest could be placed. Although the date of the origin of the crest, like that of

the coat-of-arms itself, is uncertain, according to David Crouch an early form of this

decoration first appeared in the thirteenth century, when it became popular for knights to

encircle their helmets with twisted silk wreaths. These adornments gradually grew more

elaborate, eventually taking on the complex and eye-catching form of the crest as it existed in

the fifteenth-century Holy Roman Empire. Significantly, a crest allowed for a three-

dimensional aspect not applicable to the two-dimensional surface of a shield or caparison,

making them an even more impressive medium for display in the tournament. Birds in cages,

models of mythical beasts such as dragons or wyverns, or animal heads of all sorts were

common features of crests, and by Maximilian’s time they had taken on all sorts of fantastical

shapes. Items like these were probably constructed of boiled and moulded leather, known as

cuir boulli, or cloth stretched over a wooden frame. Other varieties of the crest could also

include cloth hangings, or cointoises, and plumes of feathers, both of which would look striking

when caught in the wind as a knight took part in a tourney or joust.45

43 See Appendix 1, Figure 32. 44 Almost any Turnierbuch offers evidence of these textile coverings. For example, see von Leitner,

ed., Freydal, plates 1, 2, 10, 14, 17, 18, 21, 22, 26, and many others, where this phenomenon is clearly visible.

45 Crouch, Tournament, pp. 146-48.

182

The initial function of the crest seems to have been a purely decorative one; later,

however, they became more individualized and served as a way of identifying the wearer.

Sometimes a crest might be a direct representation of the wearer’s coat-of-arms, or be

connected to it in some way. The Black Prince, son of King Edward III of England, wore a

lion as his crest, which was related to the English royal coat-of-arms. This heraldic connection

was not always present, however. Instead a crest’s form might also be dictated by a personal

badge of the wearer – a symbol unique to the individual and separate from a hereditary coat-

of-arms, much in the same way Gasper Lamberger often appeared in the lists with a porcupine

on his caparison. At one point King Richard II of England had a golden sun made for his

helm as a personal emblem.46

Indeed, the crest as a way to identify those competing in the tournament was one of its

primary functions. In Freydal, for instance, Maximilian is almost always identifiable by his

ostentatious crest in the form of a large plume of feathers in some arrangement (normally

coming out from the centre of a crown). While his opponents are identified by their name

written beneath them, Maximilian needs only his imperial crest to identify him.47 In Marx

Walther’s Turnierbuch, Walther is easily identifiable in a tourney by his tall crest in the form of a

skewer of sausages.48 Indeed, it is in the tourney where the individual crest becomes most

useful. BSB, Cod.icon 398 depicts two tourneys in which all the participants are dressed

identically. In both of these cases each combatant wears an individual crest, whether it be a

wreath of flowers, a pair of flails, or a spindle, allowing them to retain an individual identity

amongst their competitors.49

46 Juliet Barker, The Tournament in England: 1100-1400 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1986), pp. 180-81. 47 For examples, see von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 7, 17, 19, and 21, among others. 48 See Appendix 1, Figure 33. Munich, BSB, Cgm 1930, plate 18. 49 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 56 and 58.

183

It is unsurprising then that the variety of forms and shapes which the crest could take

was immense. These could often be extravagant and noble, echoing the themes found in the

imagery of the caparisons. Again, love imagery was very popular. Wilhelm IV jousted with a

crest of two clapsed hands held together with a padlock, for example.50 Animals as well are

found frequently both on the caparison and the crest, and the variety of those used is

impressive, ranging from the mundane to the mythical.51 Religious connotations could be

found represented in the crest as well: Gasper Lamberger seems to have been fond of jousting

with a crown of thorns as his crest.52 Interestingly, feminine imagery often appears on the

crest. During a February 1502 tournament, Marino Sanuto described Maximilian jousting

against Count Wolfgang of Fürstenberg, during which Maximilian reportedly wore a siren as a

crest (et in zima l’elmo havea una sirena).53 In Freydal, when not wearing his distinctive feathered

crest, Maximilian is shown several times with a mermaid crest.54 He also appears wearing a

replica of a woman’s hat and veil.55

Finally, some crests were designed to add interest to the knight’s tournament garb

through added visual or aural effects, such as the boy’s training lance recreated as a crest

described in Section 5.2. A dual tower of bells in a print by Burgkmair the Younger is another

example which would have added sound as well as looking impressive.56 Many crests, however,

50 Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, plate 4. Another example of a heart as a crest may be found in Munich, BSB Cod.icon 398, plate 76.

51 Examples of this include The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger: a pig (plate 45); Munich, BSB Cod.icon 403: an owl (plates 9 and 11), fish and a dog (plate 13), a peacock and a ram (plate 15); von Leitner, ed., Freydal: a dragon (plate 90).

52 The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, pp. 19, 31, 33, 41, 45, 46, 49, 51-54. 53 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 217-18. 54 von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 19 and 40. 55 von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 59. Such imagery harks back to Ulrich von Liechtenstein and his

Venusfahrt, when the nobleman travelled the countryside dressed as Venus and jousted against all who challenged him.

56 Pallmann, ed., Hans Burgkmair des Jüngeren: Turnierbuch von 1529, plate 7.

184

appear slightly silly to modern eyes, such as Marx Walther’s skewer of sausages. In one

particularly unusual instance, Gasper Lamberger wears what appears to be a basket of kittens

on his helmet.57

The crest could also serve as a symbol of its wearer’s social standing. The previously

discussed tourney of the so-called Gemain Hofgesindt which took place as part of a 1491

tournament in Nuremberg and is depicted in BSB, Cod.icon 398 shows the lower members of

the court engaged in a form of the Kolbenturnier.58 These competitors all wear very utilitarian

crests, including a bellows, a wool winder, a plough harness, and a spindle; very different items

from the colourful lions, crowns, or peacock feathers found on other knights.59 These men are

marked out as being of lesser social standing by their functional crests, representative of items

from everyday life.

The 1519 inventory of Maximilian’s armour house in Augsburg includes, in addition to

its large collection of tournament arms and armour, a record of several crests (see Table 6).

The inventory refers to them with the ENHG term Vederpüsch, or, literally, ‘feather bush’,

interpreted here as ‘crest of feathers’. This label is unsurprising, as feathers appear frequently in

illustrated sources as a popular form of crest. While these crests are described as made

primarily of feathers (most often black, when the colour is specified), they include additional

elements as well. One, for example, contains six silver gilded pomegranates, which was one of

Maximilian’s personal emblems – another instance of the crest replicating an individual’s

familial or personal symbol.60 Another crest in the inventory appears to have been made to

57 See Appendix 1, Figure 34. The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, p. 41. 58 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 58. 59 See Appendix 1, Figure 7. 60 An elderly Maximilian can be seen holding a pomegranate in a 1518 portrait by Albrecht Dürer

currently in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (Gemäldegalerie, Inv.-Nr. 825).

185

replicate the Habsburg eagle, with spread wings and a gilded crown and feet. This inventory is

a valuable supplement to the pictorial records of Maximilian’s tournaments, as it offers proof

that the elaborate crests depicted in the manuscripts and engravings were not exaggerated

fancies of the illustrators. Such crests, like one made to look like a dragon’s head, did indeed

exist and were valuable enough to be preserved in Maximilian’s armour house.

Vederpwchen: Item ain grosser schwarzer vederpusch auf ainem helmlett

Crests of feathers: One large black crest of feathers on a helm

Item ain schwarzen vederpüsch mit funf silbren vergulten margrandenöpfel und in der mitt ain grossen silbern und ain vergulten margrandapfel

One black crest of feathers with five silver gilded pomegranates and in the middle a large silver and gilded pomegranate

Item ain grossen vederpüschen mit ainem vergültem gesteck auf ain helmlet mit zwai flügln, daran silbren und vergult rosen und schrawfen

One large crest of feathers with a gilded floral arrangement on a helm with two wings, on which are silver and gilded roses and decorations

Item ain schwarzen puschen mit langen tolden auf den trackenkopf

One black feathered crest with long golden spikes on a dragon’s head

Item fünfundzwainzig swarz land federn auf helmlet Twenty-five black (?) feathers on a helm

Item vier schwarz püschen auf rosstirnen Four black feathered crests on shaffrons

Item drei püschen auf helmlet order stirnen Three feathered crests on a helm or a shaffron

Item ain vederpusch, gemacht wie ain adler mit aufgethanen flüglen und zwu vergült krönen und fuessen

One feathered crest, made (to look) like an eagle with spread wings and gilded crown and feet

Table 6: Crests in the 1519 Augsburg Inventory61

5.6 Decorations in the Lists

The colourful designs of textiles and other materials were not only to be found on man and

horse in the tournament, however. They were on display all around, in various forms, in the

61 Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus- Hof- und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, ed. by Heinrich Zimerman, in Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses, vol. 3, 2 (1885), no. 2955, p. 84.

186

lists. These decorative elements might include tents for the participants, or the dress of

attendants, evidence for which is available in various forms. These displays of decoration,

while not born by horse or rider, still warrant inclusion and discussion, as they are a vital part

of creating the overall image for a tournament which was often requisite in Maximilian’s day;

they are an integral part of the tournament space.

The inspiration for such luxury on display at a tournament can be traced back to the

influence on Maximilian of the Burgundian court and its lavish pas d’armes, which involved

elaborate set-pieces and accessories to the tournament apart from the men and horses.62 These

additional elements helped to transform the tournament from an athletic competition into a

true event. While Maximilian’s tournaments most commonly took place in the central square

of whatever city in which he was currently residing, such festive embellishments would have

helped to set the space apart as an area for festivities; it would have been marked as

temporarily special.

This is demonstrated in the 1495 encounter between Maximilian and his Burgundian

challenger, Claude de Vauldrey. In his description of the event, Ludwig von Eyb built up a

wonderful sense of suspense and anticipation as he described the two men preparing

themselves in separate, lavish pavilions which they erected outside of the newly constructed

stands made just for theoccasion.63 In this way, these temporary textile ‘houses’ represented a

safe space where the nobles could prepare themselves for combat. There they could transform

from ordinary men into chivalric warriors in the tournament arena. Reinhard Noltz also wrote

that each hung their shield and helmet outside their separate tents, although he makes no

62 For an excellent study of the Burgundian pas d’armes, see Sébastien Nadot, Le Spectacle des joutes: Sport et courtoisie à la fin du Moyen Âge (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2013).

63 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, pp. 156-57.

187

mention of how these shields were adorned.64 The tents thus symbolise the men themselves

and mark out their territory in the lists, acting as miniature representations of the Holy Roman

Empire and Burgundy. Heralds then emerged from these competing spaces to make

proclamations concerning the combat which was about to get underway.65

These heralds and other attendents also played a vital role; they were their own sort of

decorative element. During the tournament of February 1502, Marino Sanuto describes how

Maximilian and the men taking part in his tournament, when entering the lists, were followed

by a magnificent parade of squires, each bearing the coat-of-arms of the various combatants.

They entered the arena to the sound of trumpets, and the entire group was then presented to

the judges.66 In this scenario, the squires are an essential part of the tournament spectacle

because of their role as bearers of the knights’ coats-of-arms, and they often were dressed to

appear central to the event.

After all, the colourful textiles of the tournament were not just for the knights and

their horses. A knight’s squires and attendants might dress in colours to match him, and they

would be there to assist him in the lists if he should drop his lance or fall from his horse. A

knight might even have musicians as part of his entourage. This was essentially a way of

identifying a ‘team’ in a tournament. Everyone affiliated with a certain knight could display

their allegiance through the aid of textiles. This trend is demonstrated in several illustrations.

Marx Walther in his Turnierbuch shows off his prominence as a tournament competitor by

depicting not only himself in the lists but a multitude of squires, attendents, and even two

musicians with him, all dressed in colours to match Walther so that they are unmistakable as

64 Monumenta Wormatensia, p. 397. 65 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, pp. 157. 66 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, pp. 217-18.

188

being part of his entourage.67 Walther’s opponent, on the other hand, has no one to assist him,

marking Walther out as the figure of greater significance. Such a display could be a sign of

Walther’s aspirations – to portray himself as a wealthy and successful tournament combatant,

worthy to be considered in the same league as Maximilian.

5.7 Conclusions

All told, the textiles discussed in this chapter offer up a dizzying array of colourful imagery and

reveal something of the splendour of Maximilian’s court to the modern eye which is not always

evident through the cold metal of armour alone. The unique symbols and mottos featured on

the horses’ caparisons or on the knights’ shields or their crests would have each carried a

certain meaning common in tournament garb and recognizable to other knights of the time.

This is manifested in part through the repeating imagery borne by different knights across the

various manuscripts. These textiles represent a visual language of chivalry through which one

knight could have communicated his beliefs or his virtues to others who also understood this

code. They also represent something uniquely German, for they do not fall within the confines

of normal heraldry or emblem studies. The German allegorical iconography found in the

Turnierbücher of Maximilian, Johann of Saxony, Gasper Lamberger, Wilhelm IV, or even Marx

Walther feature naturalistic figures, a wide range of colours and elaborate designs, and

specifically German phrasing, all of which mark them out from other tournaments of their

time.

67 See Appendix 1, Figure 35. Munich, BSB, Cgm 1930, plate 13. Other appearences of squires in tournament books include The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, p. 14; Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 28, 40, 42, 66, 72; von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 43 and 125. Such images also bring to mind the Westminster Tournament Roll of Henry VIII, a monarch influenced by Maximilian, which depicts an entire tournament setting, not only showing the jousting knights but a large assortment of squires in matching apparel and the tournament pavilions.

189

Like the armour which was made only to be worn at tournament, these textiles were

part of a knight’s wardrobe made expressly for this purpose. And rulers like Maximilian or the

nobles of his court had multiple ensembles from which to choose when they competed, in

order to display both their wealth and athletic prowess, as is evidenced by the fact that

Maximilian and his network of tournament competitors never appear bearing the same textiles

twice, even within one tournament. After all, the decorative elements of tournament

equipment were not just for the competitors alone; the audience was also meant to enjoy this

display. This opulence apparently served its purpose well, as it made an impression on those

who witnessed the competitions. One French chronicler, recording a series of tournaments for

which he was present at Maximilian’s court in 1503, wrote that the knights’ trappings were ‘of

velvet and satin in various colours, and all were accoutred in that country’s fashion’.68

By examining these various manuscripts and Turnierbücher, it is immediately clear that

the pageantry of these jousts, manifested in the form of the rich and vibrant textiles, is a key

feature of the event in the context of Maximilian’s court. It is this pageantry which is part of

what helped to elevate Maximilian’s tournaments from military training to almost a form of

theatre and which helped him to cement his reputation in his own lifetime and beyond. The

lure of the tournament drew others to his court and placed him at the centre of a lavish

spectacle designed to show off both athletic skill and royal prosperity. The centrality of these

remarkable tournaments to Maximilian’s court will be the focus of the next chapter.

68 Leurs houchures estoient de velour et de satin de divers couleurs, et estoient tous bien acoustrés à la mode du pays, Collection des voyages des souverains des Pays-Bas, p. 321. Houchures (modern French: housses), appears here to mean ‘covers’, in reference to the textile caparisons. This quote is also of particular interest because it includes a rare description of the fabric (velour and satin) from which these caparisons were constructed. This joust, held à la mode d'Allemaigne, or in the German style, took place among the grands maistres et gentilshomes de la maison du roy.

190

Chapter 6: The Place of Tournaments in Maximilian’s Court Culture

6.1 Introduction

This final chapter will explore the overall place of tournaments in Maximilian’s court culture. It

will examine the various roles tournaments played in the court Maximilian built around himself

during his rule and illustrate their centrality and significance in his court and, by extension, his

reign. Previous chapters have shown the frequency with which Maximilian was involved in a

tournament in some capacity throughout his life (Chapter 2), the complexity of the forms of

combat involved in these events (Chapter 3), and the intricacies of the equipment involved –

both practical and decorative (Chapter 4 and Chapter 5, respectively). This chapter will build

upon the evidence presented and conclusions drawn in these chapters to create a final,

comprehensive picture of the importance of tournaments to Maximilian and how they affected

his court culture.

First a brief note on the makeup and defining elements of Maximilian’s court is

necessary, as this had an undeniable influence on how tournaments fit into this unique

environment. For one, Maximilian’s court was distinctive in that it was highly mobile. Other

German rulers spent more time in fixed locations, such as Heidelberg for the Palatinate or

Munich and Landshut for different dukes of Bavaria. Maximilian, however, was almost always

on the move.1 As Michael Chisholm put it, ‘To be a member of the imperial court was to be a

peripatetic,’ citing the example of a Venetian ambassador to Maximilian’s court who

complained that ‘during the twenty months he had spent in Germany, he had been almost

1 For an investigation of the logistics involved in moving an early modern court, see Maria Hayward, ‘Transporting Royal Treasures: A Case study from the Court of Henry VIII’, in Vom Umgang mit Schätzen, Internationaler Kongress, Krems an der Donau, 28-30 October 2004 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2007), pp. 307-26.

191

permanently on horseback’.2 A contributing factor to this itinerancy was that Maximilian

lacked a central, permanent capital. He rather favoured travelling from place to place at a fairly

rapid rate, sometimes only staying in a city for a matter of days before moving on to another.

This itinerancy allowed him to keep a closer eye on his widespread empire. Maximilian’s

presence in a city would help to remind its citizens who their ultimate ruler was and to

simultaneously impress them with the splendour of his presence.3 The itinerant nature of the

court also meant that its members were never consistently the same either. Instead nobles

would come and go from Maximilian’s court based on their proximity to his current city of

residence and their own governing responsibilities as high-ranking noblemen.4

As just one minor representation of Maximilian’s frequent movements, Table 7 shows

Maximilian’s itinerary for the year 1494.5 1494 was a year of great upheaval and activity for

Maximilian. Following the death of Frederick III in 1493, he now found himself Holy Roman

emperor. He had just married his second wife, Bianca Maria Sforza. He also became embroiled

in wars in Italy when Charles VIII of France invaded, and Maximilian joined the Holy League

alongside the pope, Spain, Venice, and Milan. Yet the emperor was also hosting and

participating in tournaments. In January, as part of celebrations to honour Bianca Maria,

2 Chisholm, ‘Robert Wingfield: English Ambassador to the Holy Roman Empire (1510-1517)’, p. 76. Chisholm also offers the example of English ambassador Robert Wingfield, also mentioned in Chapter 1, whose experience was similar: ‘His [Wingfield’s] itinerary shows that he rarely remained in the same place more than a month. In 1513, for example, he slept in at least 60 different towns. Moreover, he covered great distances, travelling between England, the Netherlands, and Germany several times, and within Germany, Austria, Styria, the Tyrol, and Italy regularly.’

3 Martin Gosman, ‘Princely Culture: Friendship or Patronage?’ in Princes and Princely Culture: 1450-1650, vol. 1, pp. 1-29; Andreas H. Zajic, ‘Repräsentation durch Inschriftenträger. Symbolische Kommunikation und Integration des Adels zwischen Hof und Grundherrschaft in den beiden österreichischen Erzherzogtümern im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert’, in Symbolische Interaktion in der Residenzstadt des Spätmittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit, pp. 129-70.

4 Müller, ‘The Court of Emperor Maximilian I’, in Princes and Princely Culture: 1450-1650, vol. 1, pp. 295-311.

5 This table was compiled using the Regesta Imperii.

192

tournaments were held in Innsbruck. In August, a fantastic tournament was held in Mechlin

for the marriage of Maximilian courtier Wolfgang von Polheim. All this while being almost

incessantly on the road.

January

1 Vienna

15 Innsbruck

16 Vienna

24 Innsbruck

25 Vienna

February

14 Klosterneuburg

18 St Pölten

22 Melk

23 Ybbs

24 Enns

26 Wels

March

4 Vöcklabruck

5 Straßwalchen

5 Salzburg

9 Hall

13 Innsbruck

16 Hall

23 Telfs

25 Nassereit

25 Ehrenberg

26 Füssen

April 18 Kempten

May

11 Pfaffenhausen

12 Mindelheim

12 Kempten

13 Mindelheim

14 Kempten

26 Memmingen

27 Ulm

June 2 Esslingen

4 Pforzheim

193

6 Speyer

12 Worms

18 Mainz

22 Cologne

July

4 Aachen

8 Sittard

10 Maastricht

14 Sittard

17 Maastricht

17 Sittard

22 Maastricht

August

2 Weert

3 Grav

6 Mechlin

9 Grave

18 Antwerp

20 Mechlin

25 Leuven

26 Mechlin

26 Leuven

September

5 Antwerp

5 Leuven

12 Mechlin

16 Leuven

17 Mechlin

18 Mechlin

October 6 Antwerp

November 1 Antwerp

17 Halle (in Hainault)

20 Antwerp

December

10 Vilvoorde

10 Antwerp

24 Mechlin

27 Bergen op Zoom

30 Antwerp

Table 7: Maximilian’s Itinerary, 1494

194

Each of these factors described above affected how Maximilian’s court was run.

Because of these reasons, Maximilian needed his court to be a location where he could bring

members of his highly varied territories together in an environment which fostered peace and

stability as well as inspiring loyalty to Maximilian. In accomplishing this, tournaments would

serve a vital role.

6.2 Tournament Occasions

As part of courtly life, the tournament played an important role in many ways. There were

several reasons that a tournament might take place in Maximilian’s court, and, in turn, several

purposes which they served. Four primary occasions will be discussed here: times of year

(specifically the example of Fastnacht), celebratory, political, and recreational. Each of these

categories could often, of course, overlap as well. Across these four categories, the tournament

demonstrates its numerous and varied uses and its importance to Maximilian, both as a host

of, a witness to, and a participant in these events. Also evident is the broad range of effort

which might go to into such an event, from lavish spectacle to casual competition, and the

wide variety of forms which a tournament might take. Yet each in its own way was still a vital

part of Maximilian’s court.

6.2.a Fastnacht Tournaments

Certain times of year were favoured by Maximilian for holding tournaments. The most popular

of these, as this thesis has repeatedly shown, was the Fastnacht period, or the festive time

leading up to the liturgical season of Lent which often lasted from January to March. This was

an extended period of time traditionally devoted to feasting, festive activities, and general

195

indulgence in anticipation of the more austere weeks of Lent.6 Tournaments fit in well with

this motif. Fastnacht tournaments are well documented for the years 1494, 1496, 1487, 1498,

1500, 1502, 1504, and 1511. These Fastnacht tournaments were often held in

Maximilian’spreferred city in which to base his court, Innsbruck. Innsbruck was a city well laid

out for tournaments, with its expansive and even market square beneath Maximilian’s own

Goldenes Dachl. 7 Maximilian’s tournaments, after all, were never held out in the open

countryside as those of earlier centuries might have been. They were instead always held in his

city of residence’s central square, in order to attract the most attention. It was both a practical

and a political use of space.8

The Fastnacht period and its accompanying tournaments of 1494, 1496, 1497, 1498,

1500, and 1502 were all held in Innsbruck. In February 1496, a letter written by the Tyrolean

nobleman Sebastian von Mandach described how the young ladies of the court were all

wishing that Prince Rudolf IV of Anhalt (1466-1510) and Maximilian would arrive soon in

Innsbruck so that they could all spend this merry time before Lent in tournaments and

dances.9 The Fastnacht tournaments in Innsbruck in the year 1498 are also well documented.

This is in spite of the fact that, at this time, Maximilian was meant to be travelling to Freiburg

for the Reichstag. However, throughout this period as described in Chapter 2, Maximilian

showed no inclination to hasten to attend to his political duties. In a letter to Duke Albrecht

IV of Bavaria, his secretary Georg Eisenreich speculated that Maximilian was unlikely to leave

6 Dieter Kramer, German Holidays and Folk Customs (Hamburg: Atlantik-Brücke, 1972), pp. 10-14. 7 For more on Maximilian’s relationship with the city of Innsbruck see, Riegel,

‘Bausteine eines Residenzprojekts. Kaiser Maximilian I. in Innsbruck’, pp. 28-45, and Wiesflecker-Friedhuber, ‘Kaiser Maximilian I. und die Stadt Innsbruck’, pp. 125-58.

8 For more information on city space as utilised in tournaments, see Mario Damen, ‘The Town as a Stage? Urban Space and Tournaments in Late Medieval Brussells’, pp. 1-25.

9 Regesta Imperii, Österreich, Reich und Europa, RI XIV, 2 n. 6864. Original source: Innsbruck, Tiroler Landesarchiv, Maximiliana-Akten, IVa, fol. 175.

196

Innsbruck for Freiburg before Easter due to Fastnacht revelries. In fact, the electors Friedrich

III and Johann of Saxony summoned many of their own household knights from Freiburg to

Innsbruck for the purpose of participating in tournaments, a counterproductive move in terms

of commencing the diet.10

The Fastnacht festivities and tournaments of 1500, which again took place in Innsbruck,

also further illustrate Maximilian’s penchant for combining tournament pleasure with imperial

politics. In Innsbruck Maximilian received various Italian noblemen, including his wife Bianca

Maria Sforza’s uncle, Duke Ludovico Sforza of Milan, as well as ambassadors from Spain and

Naples. A tournament was held around the 19th of January, the primary purpose of which was

undoubtedly to welcome and entertain Maximilian’s foreign guests and to gain their good

favour through hospitality. Duke Ludovico, as he wrote in a letter to his kinsman Cardinal

Ascanio Sforza, was able to show Maximilian an important letter that he received from the

Milanese envoy Galeazzo Visconti while Maximilian was watching the tournament.11 Thus,

even in the midst of diverting entertainment, political manoeuvrings were clearly happening

amongst Maximilian and his peers; indeed, the two often went hand-in-hand. As part of

Maximilian’s efforts to impress, alongside descriptions of the tournament frequent references

were made by Ludovico to the different meals the emperor hosted, i.e. when and where they

took place and who was being entertained. There was also mention of dancing taking place

10 Deutsche Reichstagskaten, vol. 5, pp. 532-33. 11 According to Duke Ludovico, this letter regarded the willingness for peace of the Swiss and

greatly pleased Maximilian. The contents of the letter probably concerned the recently settled Treaty of Basel, which brought an end to the Swabian War, a conflict between the Swiss Confederacy and the Habsburgs over territorial disputes.

197

after dinner – a customary occurrence accompanying the more lavish tournaments and about

which more will be said below.12

6.2.b Celebratory Occasions

One of the most obvious reasons for holding a tournament in any medieval court was,

naturally, as part of a celebratory or otherwise significant event. Most prominently, these could

include weddings, coronations, holidays, or other festive events. Tournaments were a long-

standing part of courtly celebrations, and Maximilian’s court was no different.13 The

celebrations surrounding Maximilian’s coronation as king of the Romans in 1486, discussed in

Chapter 2, stand as a good example of this. As Romischer König and later as Holy Roman

emperor, Maximilian would go on to continue in this tradition, often placing tournaments at

the centre of any great courtly celebration.14

Weddings are by far the most commonly documented occasion at which tournaments

took place, such as that held in in Mechlin in September 1494 to celebrate the wedding of

Maximilian’s Rennen und Gestech Meister Wolfgang von Polheim to Johanna von Borsselen of the

Netherlands. As mentioned in Chapter 2, this was a massive tournament involving many

nobles from around the Empire which took place over several days. Indeed, the marriage

ceremony itself would only have been a small part of this overall celebration, while Georg

12 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 3, 1 n. 9722, n. 9723. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 587.

13 Tournament activitiy swirled around Maximilian’s court when he was not present as well, as in 1502, when Maximilian and his second wife, Bianca Maria Sforza were travelling between Augsburg, Regensburg, and Nuremberg. Bianca Maria, however, was travelling behind her husband, only arriving in Augsburg after he had left. Still, tournaments were reportedly held there in her presence, while Maximilian was still on the road, Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 543,

14 In a chivalric conjunction of events, many of the nobles who competed in these tournament festivities went on to be knighted by Maximilian after his own coronation, a ceremony he completed reportedly using the sword of Charlemagne. A list of those knighted and a description of the events may be found in Anton Sorg, Krönung Erzherzog Maximilians zu einem römischen König.

198

Spalatin, in his description of events, devotes substantial time to accounts of the tournaments.

Nobles such as Elector Friedrich III of Saxony were present, along with von Polheim’s

counterpart in the Triumphzug Anthony von Yfan, as well as producer of his own Turnierbuch

Gasper Lamberger.15

The beginning of 1502 marked another instance where tournaments accompanied a

wedding: the marriage of Balthasar Wolf von Wolfsthal, Maximilian’s Hofkammermeister (‘court

chamberlain’), again in that favoured city of Innsbruck. This occasion also overlaps with the

favoured time for such celebrations of Fastnacht. The Venetian ambassador Zaccaria Contarini

described the prolonged period of bagordi, or ‘revelries’, in his letters beginning 12 January,

saying that throughout the carnival period of Fastnacht many jousts were held and that

Maximilian himself took part as well. These competitions were also accompanied by banquets

and balls held in the evenings. Again, the tournaments are just one part of celebrations which

would go on for several days.16

More tournaments focussed on a wedding celebration occur the very next year. In

1503, feasts and tournaments were held at the beginning of October in, once more, Innsbruck.

These centred on the celebrations of the marriage of Count Julian of Lodron and Apollonia

Lang. Once more, the wedding was just a part of the list of ritual celebrations which took place

when nobles from across the Empire were gathered together. Maximilian heard mass with his

son, Philip the Fair, before processing out to take part in several jousts in front of the

Hofburg.17 Over several days more tournaments took place as well as feasting and dancing.18

15 Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, pp. 230-31. 16 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 4, 1, n. 15899. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca

Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 122 f. See also Wiesflecker, Kaiser Maximilian I.: das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur Neuzeit, vol. 5, p. 389.

17 Collection des voyages des souverains des Pays-Bas, p. 319. 18 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 5, p. 152.

199

Finally, lavish tournaments as part of wedding celebrations at Maximilian’s court

continued even as the emperor entered middle age. These are preserved in pictorial form in

BSB, Cod.icon 398, which illustrates a tournament held in Heidelberg in 1511. This selection

of Rennen and Gestech occurred as part of the wedding of Count Palatine Ludwig V to

Maximilian’s niece Sibille, daughter of Duke Albrecht IV of Bavaria, in February of that year.19

It is worth noting that these wedding celebrations were, again, designed to fall within the

Fastnacht period.

These noble weddings held at court were, in many respects, the ideal time for

Maximilian to promote the tournament. As emperor Maximilian did not always have the time

or the money to put on a full display of his imperial power. Weddings would have offered an

opportunity for Maximilian to put on a show. Such an event would have drawn nobles from

across his realms to his court, and while there a tournament would make an excellent addition

to the schedule. They brought other nobles together in friendly competition, while also

allowing (until his much later years at least) Maximilian himself a chance to show off his skill in

the lists. The tournament played a critical role in the overall structure of a wedding celebration

by enhancing the impression of power and prosperity with which Maximilian wished to imbue

his court.

6.2.c Political Occasions

Tournaments at Maximilian’s court were not merely always a celebratory event, however. They

also played a political role in many ways, either as part of larger events or an event unto

themselves. Aside from the tournament’s draw for knights seeking to enhance their reputation,

19 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 59.

200

they could also be a setting for diplomatic manoeuvring within the court. When he himself was

not participating, Maximilian often used tournaments as the ideal setting for meeting and

discussing politics with envoys and legates from other kingdoms – much in the way modern

politicians might play a game of golf together. The tournament offered an occasion to impress

visiting dignitaries, particularly when court life was normally much simpler and pointed

displays of wealth were not a daily occurrence.

As has been established, Maximilian was an extremely active ruler and full of energy

which was always in search of an outlet. This made pinning him down for a prolonged

discussion difficult. From the perspective of English ambassador Robert Wingfield, an

audience with Maximilian worked something like this: ‘Sometimes Maximilian summoned him;

other times Wingfield requested an audience, or, as he wrote, he intended to “follow” the

emperor in the hope of getting one. Audiences usually took place in the morning or evening.

Lasting often for hours, they could be in council with imperial councillors and sometimes

other ambassadors; or they could be private in the emperor’s chamber, in an oratory during

mass, or at his dinner table; occasionally they began in council and ended in private.’20 In the

midst of such frenetic activities, a tournament made an admirable venue for extended

discussion in a setting which would also hold the emperor’s attention.

In February 1502, for example, Maximilian travelled from Innsbruck to nearby Hall.

There he was to meet with ambassadors from France, Burgundy, and Spain, and he had

arranged for a tournament to be held as well, according to Venetian legate Zaccharia Contarini.

On 4 February Contarini wrote that Maximilian was about to depart Innsbruck and should be

gone for three days. It was also implied that while in Hall Maximilian would be meeting the

20 Chisholm, ‘Robert Wingfield: English Ambassador to the Holy Roman Empire (1510-1517)’, p. 74.

201

ambassadors, messieurs Sichon, Naturelli, and Courteville.21 In this way Maximilian could mix

business with pleasure.

It should first be noted that tournaments did not, however, always serve to forward

Maximilian’s political interests. In fact, they sometimes seemed to be a hindrance rather than a

help, as the emperor’s love of the tournament sometimes won out over his necessary political

duties. In the same year of 1502, Contarini also complained that he was unable to meet with

Maximilian because the emperor was busy all day with tournaments and stayed all night at

parties and dances.22 While he was seemingly sometimes able to balance his love of

tournaments with his political duties, especially when combining the two to their best

advantage, there are numerous other instances where Maximilian appears to have shirked his

ruling responsibilities for the enjoyment and escapism of athletic competition.

A particularly interesting example of this is his interaction with the Italian knight

Gaspare de Sanseverino, marshal to the dukes of Milan and known as frachasso (introduced in

Chapter 2).23 In 1498, Sanseverino travelled to Innsbruck accompanied by thirty-three knights.

He had, in fact, been expected to arrive on 16 February, yet he had reportedly ridden ahead in

haste, leaving behind his wagons and packhorses, in order to arrive in time to watch a

tournament which he had heard was scheduled for the day before. Such enthusiasm indeed

makes Sanseverino appear an admirable opponent for Maximilian.24 Yet Sanseverino was not

21 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 16016. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 137v ff.

22 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 15961. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS ital, class VII, Nr 990, colloc 9582, fol. 128 f.

23 Brandstätter, ‘Aspekte der Festkultur unter Maximilian’, p. 158. A surviving suit of Sanseverino’s tournament armour for the Gestech, c. 1490, may be seen in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (Inv.-Nr. S I).

24 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5881, 5884. Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 143-146 and Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 82 ff.

202

visiting Maximilian’s court purely for the pleasure of partaking in tournaments. He was also

there representing the political interests of Duke Ludovico Sforza of Milan, who had

instructed Sanseverino to negotiate with Maximilian whilst visiting him under the pretence of

friendly athletic competition.25 Clearly other rulers of the time were aware of Maximilian’s

penchant for tournaments and saw ways to take advantage of this interest by also cleverly

working in political discussions. Yet this method did not always work, as the papal legate

Leonello Chieregati later complained that Sanseverino had brought no new interesting news to

him at Maximilian’s court, only tournament weapons.26

The role of tournaments during the imperial diets are of particular interest as well. The

concurrence of tournaments and diets has been demonstrated in Chapter 2. Maximilian’s

initiation of recreational pursuits, such as jousting or hunting, at these events might have been

a way for him to promote unity amongst his nobles. However, his oft-described penchant for

evading his duties in such circumstances also raises the question of whether these games were

a form of escape.27 For example, at the diet of Freiburg in 1497, Erasmus Brascha reported

wishing to meet with Maximilian, yet the emperor was apparently too busy with preparations

for tournaments and was not able to meet with Brascha until two days later.28 Brascha also

expressed the belief that Maximilian would not stay long at the diet of Freiburg, as he had little

desire to participate and would, in fact, much rather be hunting and hawking.29 The papal

25 Regesta Imperii, Österreich, Reich und Europa, RI XIV,2 n. 8466. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 591, istruzioni, fol. 102.

26 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5934. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 147 f.

27 Dietmar Heil, ‘“Anfengklich sollet ir inen sagen unser gnad und alles gut”: Die Reichstagsinstruktionen und Reichstagsordungen Kaiser Maximilians I. (1486/93-1519)’, in Ordnung durch Tinte und Feder?: Genese und Wirkung von Instruktionen im zeitlichen Längschnitt vom Mittelalter bis zum 20. Jahrhundert, ed. by Anita Hipfinger and others (Vienna: Böhlau Verlag, 2011), pp. 49-71.

28 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5925. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 99.

29 Deutsche Reichstagakten, vol. 5, p. 544.

203

legate Leonello Chieregati further complained that nothing new had been achieved since 16

February, since all were so involved in numerous tournaments, which had not yet come to an

end and prevented the journey onward from Innsbruck, where the court was currently based,

to Freiburg. Thus Chieregati had to remain in Innsbruck, where he wrote, perhaps facetiously,

that he was invited by Maximilian to witness his ‘glorious war games’.30 Such a description

makes it sound as though Maximilian was desparate to avoid facing his political obligations at

the imperial diet. Yet such actions could also represent a subtle power play on his part; by

refusing to make himself easily available, Maximilian may have been asserting his place as the

most important figure present (or absent). He refused to work by anybody’s schedule but his

own.31

There are also examples of the tournament taking on wholy surprising and unusual

political roles in Maximilian’s court. One of the most interesting came in September 1496,

when Maximilian received a Turkish ambassador. The ambassador brought a highly unusual

offer from the sultan in Constantinople, who suggested that he, the sultan, should fight

Maximilian in a tournament in order to settle their differences. To the astonishment of the

court Maximilian knighted the ambassador on the spot for his chivalric offer (although he did

not take him up on it).32

30 Regesta, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5934. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 147 f.

31 Such tactics were not always successful, however. Many years later, at the Reichstag in Augsburg in 1510, Maximilian was still utilising tournaments as a recreational diversion. The courtly festivities at the diet included a joust between Maximilian and his frequent opponent Elector Friederich of Saxony. However, few people attended; Maximilian’s draw was not as powerful as it once was; Wiesflecker, Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches, p. 275.

32 Wiesflecker, Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches, p. 130.

204

6.2.d Recreational Occasions

Amidst the grand and spectacular tournaments featured at court celebrations, and the

tournaments which served as a setting for political negotiations or fell alongside the imperial

diets, there were also many tournaments in which Maximilian was involved which appear to

have been staged purely as ‘joust for fun’, so to speak. References to this sort of tournament in

the primary sources tend to be brief, and they give the impression that these were not

tournaments for the sake of theatre or for making a statement of power. They were not held to

impress anyone necessarily but were rather a manifestation of Maximilian’s genuine love of the

tournament, for Maximilian seems to have truly found pleasure throughout his life in taking

part in these events.

During a series of tournaments held in January 1504, for example, the German Hans

Ungelter described a tournament centred on foot combats, along with other festivities and

masquerade dances which involved the attendees dressing up as farmers and peasants. During

this time, when Maximilian was approaching forty-six, he continued to prove that he was still

fit to compete in tournaments. In proof, throughout all of this Maximilian is described by

Ungelter as being especially cheerful and happy. Er rent und sticht und tantzt und hat kostlich welsch

tentz und bancket, Ungelter wrote – ‘He [Maximilian] jousted and danced and had exquisite

Italian dances and banquets’. The impression is reinforced that it is tournaments that

Maximilian enjoys perhaps more than any other aspect of noble life. Describing another such

event, also in 1504, Ungelter wrote, man habe gerennt, des Abends getanzt; der römische König sei ganz

fröhlich gewesen – ‘One jousted, danced in the evening; the Roman King [Maximilian] was

completely happy.’ There are subsequent references to Maximilian taking part in a Welschgestech,

as well as a combat on foot in the presence of the ladies of the court. Maximilian is again

205

described throughout by Ungelter as frölich, or happy.33 Clearly Maximilian’s enjoyment of the

tournament, even as he approached his fiftieth year, was unfeigned.

Furthermore, the tournament itself was not always a humourless event. It was not

always about Maximilian and his fellow German nobles showing off their martial skill in deadly

earnest. Wiesflecker describes how members of the court often engaged in ‘peasant-style’

dances for fun, as well as in a parody of the so-called bürgerlichen Vergröberungen des Turniers (‘a

bourgeois coarsening of the tournament’), known as the Gesellenrennen, in which young people,

while keeping things lighthearted, outfitted themselves with helmets and doublets stuffed with

hay and tried to hit each other with long poles.34 This style of joust is memorialised in BSB,

Cod.icon 398 and its illustration of a tournament in Nuremberg in 1491.35 In this image, the

lesser quality of the equipment is clearly evident, as is the raucous spirit which is very different

in tone from other depictions of the one-on-one jousts.36

6.3 Tournament Accompaniments and Consequences

In Maximilian’s court there were several elements which often accompanied these tournaments

or factors which affected their occurrence, such as the risk of injury. These surrounding factors

could have a strong influence on the tournament or even be an integral part of the event (in

33 Urkunden zur Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bundes (1488-1533), vol. 1, p. 497-98. 34 Wiesflecker, Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches, p. 22. 35 See Appendix 1, Figure 7. 36 A description of this exact joust may also be found in the Chroniken der fränkischen Städte: ‘Item

bei ent dieses kuniglichen tags als am Montag vor Petri und Pauli apostolorum ward durch den kunig ein gesellenrennen und stechen hie am Marckt innerhalb der schrancken fürgenumen. Darinn waren der kunig selbs, Herzog Friderich, Herzog Hans von Sachsen, marggraf Friderich von Brandenburg, der lantgraf[en] zu Hessen einer und sunst vil grafen, herrn und edel. Darunter waren der kunig selbs im rennzeug und ander sechs im stechzeug, die teten vil gutter rite. Und zuletst kamen 16 auf die pan, die waren mit grünen kitteln und mit heu ausgefült angetan und hetten stroen helm auf und stachen mit krucken mit einander, das was mit großer kurzweil zu sehen’: Die Chroniken der deutschen Städte: vom 14. bis ins 16. Jahrhundert, vol. 5, p. 732

206

the case of the courtly accompaniments) quite apart from the actual athletic competition itself.

Each helped to craft the tournament – its tone and focus – in certain ways. The first of these is

the many elements external to the tournament competition – i.e. the joust or the foot combat

– which were nonetheless an important part of the event when it occurred at court, such as the

courtly festivities which were often as elaborate as the athletic competitions themselves. The

second of these is more dangerous side of the tournament. Although by Maximilian’s time the

tournament was designed to be a safer event than it had in centuries past, the consequences of

such events could still be negative, and it is worth examining how these affected Maximilian’s

court.

6.3.a Courtly Trappings

The tournament was not exclusively about the moment that two or more knights came

together in physical combat, either on foot or on horseback. Visual is the key word when it

comes to Maximilian’s tournaments, which were undoubtedly a feast for the eyes involving a

plethora of textures – the very essence of spectacle. The manifestation of this spectacle has

already been discussed in chapters 4 and 5, discussing the armour and textiles involved in

Maximilian’s tournaments. Yet the spectacle extended into other events and areas which

surrounded the athletic competition. And Maximilian had a hand in organising not only the

tournaments but all the festivities which surrounded them as well.37 In 1502, while he was

resident in Innsbruck, Maximilian even noted in his Gedenkbuch his desire to build a stable for

his stallions, hunting horses, and tournament horses.38

37 Brandstätter, ‘Aspekte der Festkultur unter Maximilian’, p. 162. 38 ‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus- Hof- und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, ed. by

Heinrich Zimerman, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses, vol. 1, 2 (1883), pp. 42-43.

207

Firstly, in order for a tournament to take place, the necessary space had to be provided

and what was not already pre-existing prepared. When a tournament was due to take place lists

and audience stands had to be constructed as well (the section below points to some of the

dangers of erecting these temporary structures). These elaborate preparations are described in

accounts of the tournaments held by Maximilian at the diet of Worms in 1495, during which

Maximilian’s competition with Claude de Vauldrey was the main attraction in customary

location of the town’s central marketplace.39 On the day of the fight, according to Ludwig von

Eyb’s Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, barriers were erected to enclose the two

fighters as well as a temporary viewing stand for Maximilian’s queen, Bianca Maria Sforza, all

of which were draped with ‘golden cloths and costly tapestries’.40 German diarist Reinhart

Noltz also noted that the ground was strewn with sand as a suitable surface for the

opponents.41 Such preparations would have had to occur each time Maximilian’s court arrived

in a city in order for a tournament to take place and represent no small amount of effort.

Once preparations had taken place there were still other peripheral elements of the

courtly tournament. The audience was, in many ways, an essential courtly accompaniment to a

tournament; they were after all, for all intents and purposes, the reason for the excess of

spectacle. The audiencein Maximilian’s time was a critical cog in the staging of a tournament.

Such competitions no longer existed purely for two or more men to practice their military

skills against each other in faux combat. The atmosphere of theatre meant that the audience

also played a role of their own at these events. After all, one requires witnesses to an

impressive display of courtly extravagance, or what is the point of such an event? Theatrical

39 Deutsche Reichstagakten, vol. 5, p. 1803. 40 von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, pp. 156-57. 41 Monumenta Wormatensia: Annalen und Chroniken, pp. 396-97

208

elements, such as the ‘exploding’ pieces of armour or the vibrant textiles were created in large

part to please the audience.42 In this way, in every city to which he travelled, Maximilian might

impress its citizens with this elaborate show dedicated to the glory of his court. So while

martial skill was certainly still involved in the tournament, it was also heightened through this

setting of pseudo, highly chivalric combat. In many ways the tournament was the ultimate

visual expression of power in its life and dynamism.43

Another courtly element found alongside the athletic competition were the

entertainments of music and dancing.44 The large-scale festal tournaments held in Maximilian’s

court were almost always accompanied by mummerei, or masked dances, every evening

following the games.45 These dances are most extensively documented in Freydal, where they

are depicted in a regular cycle of jousts and foot combats and are presented as of equal

importance to the same. In the images men and women dance together in torch-lit rooms, with

musicians often visible in the background. The men wear veil-like masks which cover their

faces but do not truly conceal their features. Maximilian is easily distinguishable in each image

by his chin-length haircut and the hooked nose so common amongst the Habsburgs. In some

illustrations fools and tumblers in colourful doublets perform as well.46

42 See, the coordinating lock and key caparisons of Wilhelm IV, described in Chapter 5 and in Appendix 1, Figure 25.

43 This did not mean a boisterous audience was always appreciated, as demonstrated by the herald before the competition of Maximilian and Claude de Vauldrey (1495), who threatened to remove the head of anyone who was unduly disruptive (discussed in Chapter 2): von Eyb, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, p. 157.

44 For further information on the significance of music in Maximilian’s court, see Green, ‘Meetings of City and Court: Music and Ceremony in the Imperial Cities of Maximilian I’, pp. 261-74; Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music; and Keith Polk, ‘Patronage, Imperial Image, and the Emperor’s Musical Retinue: On the Road with Maximilian I.’ in Musik und Tanz zur Zeit Kaiser Maximilian I, pp. 79-88.

45 Monika Fink, ‘Turnier- und Tanzveranstaltungen am Hofe Kaiser Maximilians I.’, in Musik und Tanz zur Zeit Kaiser Maximilian I, pp. 37-48.

46 See, for example, von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 36.

209

The lavishness of these evening entertainments do not seem to have been greatly

exaggerated in Freydal either; many descriptions of the events themselves remain, and

Maximilian seems to have put as much effort into them as into the competitive side of the

tournament. One of his favourite devices seems to have been coming to these dances in

costume. In January 1502, following a tournament and during the evening’s music and

dancing, Maximilian and some noblemen appeared in the traditional costume of the

Landesknecht, while some of Maximilian’s men also appeared as wildmen (homeni salvetici).

Afterward, as part of the entertainment, Maximilian and Count Felix von Werdenberg (c. 1480-

1530) gave a combat demonstration to the audience using spears and daggers. Even after the

tournament Maximilian apparently could not resist showing off his martial skill.47 The next

month, in February 1502, at a mummerei following a tournament Maximilian continued his

favoured pastime of appearing in costume by coming, along with his stable master and the

duke of Mecklenburg (at this time, most likely Magnus II), dressed as Italian peasants.48

Putting on such extravagant entertainments for the amusement of his court was not

inexpensive. In March 1500, Maximilian paid 100 Gulden rheinisch for new mummerei outfits.49

Just one month later, in April, Maximilian paid a burgher of Augsburg 500 Gulden rheinisch for

jewels (or jewellery) purchased for mummerei held in Munich.50 It is little surprise though that

Maximilian invested such sums into the evening entertainments that fell alongside his

tournaments. They allowed him to continue to show off all aspects of his court following a

47 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 216. 48 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 217. 49 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV, 3, 1, n. 10011. Original source: Vienna, HKA, gb 7, fol.

69=67. 50 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,3,1 n. 10059. Original source: Vienna, HKA, gb 7, fol. 82

ff.=80 ff. The same account also mentions that he paid 450 Gulden Rheinisch to a man named Philipp Adler for the same reason.

210

day’s entertainment in the lists. In February of 1504, Maximilian hosted a costly mummerei in

Augsburg at which his sister Kunigunde and her three daughters were the guests of honour.

Maximilian made his striking entrance alongside forty musicians and thirty companions all

dressed in peasant costumes. Among them were a group of women who performed a country

dance. In a grand reveal, Maximilian and his companions then shed their peasant costumes and

appeared instead dressed in gold. There then followed much dancing, playing, and singing.

Maximilian, as with the jousts described above, was again described as very happy

throughout.51

6.3.b Violence and Injuries

Even in this courtly context a tournament was not always a purely theatrical event free of

consequences. Something that very often went along with the court tournament were injuries

of various sorts; even though by Maximilian’s time the tournament had evolved considerably

from its original purpose as an often brutal form of military training.52 It had indeed become

much more of a spectator sport, slowly diverging away from its earliest form and becoming an

event unto itself. The evolution of the arms and armour used demonstrates this perfectly, with

the equipment utilised having lost much of its resemblance to practical battlefield armour in its

effort to guarantee the safety of its wearer. The mechanical elements of armour found

frequently in various forms of the Rennen, which simulated possible injury without actually

incurring it, is the perfect example of this.

51 Urkunden zur Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bundes (1488-1533), p. 498. 52 A good exploration of this subject is Vale, ‘Violence and the Tournament’, pp. 143-57.

211

Yet while there are examples of an almost artificial form of danger in the tournament,

the risk of injury was still very real.53 Despite the risk and despite his status as a ruler,

Maximilian threw himself into the tournament, proving to be a competitor of great skill.

During the many tournaments held to celebrate Maximilian’s coronation as king of the

Romans in 1486, Maximilian jousted in the presence of his father, the emperor Frederick III.

The French chronicler Jean Molinet describes how the young Maximilian jousted, ‘with

blunted irons [lances] against the margrave, and they met, one against the other, with such

force that both of them, together with their horses, were thrown to the ground, without the

slightest harm, for which each thanked God’.54 Although in this instance both Maximilian and

the unnamed margrave emerged from the combat unharmed, their thanking God after their

mutual falls shows an understanding of the deadly risk involved in the joust and a sincere

gratefulness to have avoided injury.

On the same occasion in 1486, Maximilian jousted against the count palatine of the

Rhine, Philip, who knocked the newly crowned Roman king off his horse while staying seated

himself. This caused the audience watching to reportedly laugh and Frederick III to publicly

chastise his son. The unfortunate Philip had to immediately fall to his knees and beg

forgiveness of Frederick for causing amusement at the expense of the emperor’s son.

Interestingly, Oliver Auge has speculated that Frederick’s public scolding of his son was not

motivated by the loss of honour symbolised by Maximilian’s fall but rather by a fear of his son

receiving a permanent injury in the daredevil, frivolous joust – a fear perhaps motivated not so

53 Tangible evidence of this may be seen imprinted on the saddle for the Hohenzeuggestech described in Chapter 3 (see Appendix 1, Figure 11), where gouges left by lances centuries ago are clearly visible on the front of the saddle (Leeds, Royal Armouries, VI.94).

54 Molinet, Chroniques, vol. 1, p. 478: Le lendemain, en la presence de l’empereur qui bien envis s’y accorda, jousta l’archiduc, son filz, à fers esmolus contre le marquis; et se rencontrèrent l’ung l’autre de telle puissance que eulx, ensemble les chevaulx, furent ruéz jus par terre, sans ester quelque pou bleschiéz, dont chescun remerchia Dieu.

212

much by fatherly love but by the fact that Maximilian was his only heir, and to risk his life in a

tournament was unnecessary.55

Maximilian, however, clearly did not heed his father’s advice, even after he became

emperor. And he was not always so lucky as in the above examples. In the spring of 1498, as

has already been discussed, Maximilian was meant to travel to Freiburg to attend the imperial

diet there. However, throughout this period he showed no inclination to hasten to attend to

his political duties, electing instead to stay in Innsbruck and host and participate in various

tournaments. This was the same occasion on which Maximilian summoned the

aforementioned Italian knight Gaspare de Sanseverino to Innsbruck to joust against him,

exercising his prerogative as emperor to summon the best tournament fighters to his court.

Before Maximilian’s own encounter with Sanseverino, however, the Italian jousted in the

presence of Maximilian and several of his nobles against his armourer, a man known only as

Zurla, with the goal of breaking four lances. On the second run, however, Sanseverino struck

Zurla on the head with his lance, piercing his helm and injuring him in his head and eye.

Sanseverino immediately rushed from his saddle to attend to the wounded man.56

Injuries to the head were one of the greatest risks of the tournament. Maximilian

himself later reportedly sustained an injury to the head (fuerat aliquantulum lesus in capite) which

caused a further delay and a necessitated a rescheduling of some of these tournaments. Then,

before his own much anticipated encounter with Sanseverino, Maximilian injured his foot in a

fall from his horse while taking part in a joust (nel cascare como si suole fare da cavalo). Although he

55 Oliver Auge, ‘»So solt e rim namen gottes mit mir hinfahren, ich were doch verderbt zu einem kriegsmann« - Durch Kampf und Turnier körperlich versehrte Adelige im Spannungsfeld von Ehrpostulat und Eigener Leistungsfähigkeit’ in Medizin, Gesellschaft und Geschichte 28 (2009), p. 32.

56 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5910. Original source: Milan, Archivio di Stato; Archivio Sforzesco; Potenze estere (Alemagna etc), cart 586/1, fol. 95 ff.

213

reportedly recovered quickly, this seemed to put a stop to his plans to joust against

Sanseverino. Indeed, the Milanese envoy to Maximilian’s court wrote that the injury was

serious and that the emperor had to suspend all further jousts.57

Finally, Maximilian himself wrote a letter to the assembly in Freiburg who were

awaiting his arrival. He explained that he had been delayed from personally attending the diet

due to a fall on his right foot (fal an unserm gerechten fuess). He had, he said, intended to depart

for Freiburg on 11 March with his accompanying nobles, yet now because of his injury he was

not able to ride or even stand, and he was in daily consultation with his doctors. As soon as he

was able, Maximilian said, he would travel to Freiburg, and he requested that the diet should

still continue to wait for his arrival.58 Maximilian’s enthusiasm for the tournament and the

resulting injury had now directly interfered with his duties as Holy Roman emperor. This is an

illustration of the extreme risk involved in a ruler of Maximilian’s stature taking part in these

dangerous games. Yet he still seemed to think it quite reasonable to request those already

assembled to await his presence and bend to his whims.

Additionally, the risk of injury was not restricted to the knights competing. At the 1485

wedding of Wolfgang von Polheim, as recorded by Georg Spalatin and described above, the

eyes and ears of several of the knights’ horses were reportedly injured when the tilt being used

in the joust was too low.59 Presumably on this occasion the horses were either struck by

splinters from the shattering lances or by the lances themselves; a grave outcome when the

horse was one of the knight’s most valuable pieces of equipment.

57 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5983. Original source: Venice, Biblioteca Nationale Marciana, MSS lat XIV/99 (4278), fol. 149.

58 Deutsche Reichstagakten, vol. 5, p. 549; Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 5988. Original source: Innsbruck, Tiroler Landesarchiv, Maximiliana-Akten, VI/I, fol. 49.

59 Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, p. 230-31.

214

Injuries were not even restricted to those within the confines of the lists. In 1502, for

example, the Venetian ambassador Marino Sanuto wrote that Maximilian held a tournament in

Hall, outside Innsbruck, the sole purpose of which was to entertain and impress the French,

Burgundian, and Spanish ambassadors who were currently visiting the emperor. This

diplomatic approach did not go as planned though, as during this tournament the temporary

wooden stands holding around 250 people collapsed, resulting in many injuries but luckily no

deaths.60

Injuries at tournament, although rarer by this time, were still an unavoidable risk to

those taking part (or even to those on the sidelines). The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries offer

many examples of the hazards of the tournament.61 Yet, despite all of this, Maximilian

continued to participate in tournaments throughout his life. And, as has been shown, he was

far from shielded from all risk of injury. Indeed, many illustrations of Maximilian from

contemporary Turnierbücher show the emperor falling from his horse in a joust; he does not

always emerge victorious.62 Yet by showing himself taking a hit Maximilian was also showing

that he was willing to risk injury and that he was tough enough to take the fall. Part of his

reputation as a skilled competitor in the tournament was tied up in the idea that he did not

have to be ‘allowed’ to win all the time and that he was brave enough to put himself in harm’s

60 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 217. 61 As has been demonstrated, injuries to the head were the most common and also the most

dangerous. Perhaps the most gruesome example of which might be the 1550 portrait of Hungarian nobleman Gregor Baci, who is depicted with a jousting lance piercing straight through his eye socket and out the opposite side of his skull (an injury which he reportedly survived). And these hazards extended even to the highest ranks of the nobility. King Henry VIII of England was permanently injured following a fall during a joust in 1536, which is widely thought to have contributed to the subsequent deterioration of his health. The worst case scenario was, however, embodied by King Henri II of France, who was killed at a tournament in Paris in 1559 when a splinter from the lance entered his helmet and pierced his eye. These examples illustrate the peril which Maximilian put himself in and his singularity in doing so throughout his life.

62 See, for example, Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 32, Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, plates 111-12, or von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 25, 29.

215

way time and time again despite the risk and, above all, as Holy Roman emperor. This ties into

the discussion below, as Maximilian was proving his worth as a tournament participant as

much as as a host of these grand events.

6.4 Maximilian and his Tournament Network

Tournaments are unique in that they are a representation of power through pageantry. Their

impact does not come through a military display of might, or political prowess, or building

works such as a castle, or art or educational patronage; rather they are pure visual extravagance

for the sake of entertainment. And particularly at Maximilian’s court, as this chapter has

shown, tournaments offered a distinctive outlet for displaying power through the medium of

spectacle. Maximilian used tournaments at his court in a variety of ways to boost his reputation

on the European stage.63 Beyond the individual occasions and courtly trimmings, the

tournament was a useful tool in Maximilian’s court in several ways, and there were many

unique purposes which it served. One factor about Maximilian’s tournaments which stands out

in particular is Maximilian’s own involvement as a participant, something which made him

notable among other contemporary European monarchs. Alongside Maximilian, the choice of

men whom he invited to participate in his tournaments was significant as well, as their

involvement helped to solidify the network of nobles in his empire. Finally, tournaments were

not only of use to Maximilian in reality. The way he utilised tournaments in the fictional

literary works that he commissioned as emperor sheds light on how he viewed their worth in

the construction of his image and interpretation of his reign.

63 Pfaffenbichler, ‘Das Turnier als Instrument der Habsburgischen Politik’, pp. 13-36.

216

6.4.a Maximilian as Tournament Participant

One of the most critical ways in which Maximilian used the tournament to broadcast his

power as a leader was by taking part in them himself. Maximilian was not merely a spectator or

a sponsor of this spectacle but also a participant within it, not only as a young man, but even

after he became emperor. And by all accounts he was extremely good at it as well, as numerous

examples have already shown. This participation was highly unusual for a ruler of this time, as

it was not common for rulers, especially ones as powerful as the Holy Roman emperor, to

participate in tournaments, due to the high level of risk involved (and exemplified above). But

this seemed to be a risk Maximilian deemed worth taking. Chapter 2 offers a picture of the

frequency with which Maximilian personally competed in tournaments. By taking part himself

Maximilian was further emphasising his power; he was drawing more attention to himself as

both a ruler hosting these grand tournaments and as a skilled competitor within them.

This was a tactic in which Maximilian was evidently quite successful. In January 1502,

Marino Sanuto described a joust between Maximilian and Count Wolfgang of Fürstenberg.

The emperor and the count ran against each other only once in an encounter which

Maximilian won spectacularly by unhorsing his opponent and forcing him to fly a full lance’s

length out of the saddle, according to Sanuto.64 Clearly German court chroniclers’ descriptions,

like those of Grünpeck, of Maximilian’s great physical strength were not entirely overstated.

The next month, in February 1502, while relating another joust in which Maximilian competed,

Sanuto described how Maximilian proved, essentially, his great manliness (in la quale la cesarea

majestà, a dir il vero, se diportò che homo che fosse).65 Two years later, in February 1504, the Venetian

ambassador and visitor to Maximilian’s court, Alvise Mocenigo, praised Maximilian for his

64 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 217-18. 65 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, p. 217.

217

chivalric behaviour after watching him compete in a tournament (E lauda molto il re di valente).66

Not only was Maximilian reportedly a powerful jouster but an honourable one as well. These

were both qualities which would be viewed not only as desirable in a tournament but also,

critically, for a ruler; Maximilian was thus demonstrating both to the audience. There is also the

Hans Burgkmair image of Maximilian jousting over the tilt at a tournament as late as 1511.67

Even as he moved beyond the normal age when most men stopped competing in

tournaments, Maximilian was still proving his virility in the lists. This too marks him out as

unusual among his peers and helped him to maintain an image of virility.

Maximilian’s success in building his reputation through the means of the tournament is

perfectly exemplified through, once again, his 1495 encounter with Claude de Vauldrey. De

Vauldrey, as has been established, was also famous for his skill in the tournament.68 Yet he

sought Maximilian out based upon the young ruler’s reputation in order to challenge him. The

story goes that de Vauldrey apparently had a vision that he must fight mit dem ersten König auf der

Welt, or ‘the principal king in the world’ – in other words, Maximilian.69 Maximilian’s

reputation as a ruler and reputation as a tournament competitor were already clearly

intertwined. The combat itself between Maximilian and de Vauldrey consisted of a mounted

joust followed by a foot combat with swords where the combatants ‘exchanged numerous

heroic blows.’ Eventually, of course, it was Maximilian who emerged from the fight victorious

and who received the adulation and victor’s prize. Reinhard Noltz wrote that the nobles

present who were acting as judges unanimously agreed that the king of the Romans had won

66 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 5, p. 883. 67 von Hefner, ed., Hans Burgkmaiers Turnier-Buch, plates 25-26. 68 Molinet, vol. 2, p. 399. 69 Deutsche Reichstagskaten, vol. 5, p. 1802.

218

the fight.70 Apparently, according to the Venetian legates who were also present, even de

Vauldrey graciously (although perhaps with little alternative) admitted that Maximilian had won

the contest.71 Then followed a most chivalrous series of events. The judges awarded the king a

golden ring and chain (or necklace) as his prize. Maximilian, however, promptly passed the

prizes on to de Vauldrey. And as soon as this happened, de Vauldrey re-presented the gifts in

turn to Maximilian’s wife, Bianca Maria Sforza, in a competition of gallantry. Bianca Maria was

apparently brought to tears by this noble re-gifting.72 Even after this Maximilian showed his

sporting side by giving de Vauldrey a consolation prize in return in the form of another gold

chain and a gold ring. In this way Maximilian could show off not only his skill in the lists but

also his largesse as a ruler through the act of gift giving.73

It was not just as a competitor that Maximilian could use historical tournaments to

boost his reputation as a ruler. He often used the setting of the tournament to display his

generosity. In a November 1502 transaction Maximilian requested that his Raitkammer

(‘accounting chamber’) in Innsbruck pay out the sum of 32 Gulden Rheinisch for a Zeug, or a suit

of armour, which Maximilian’s Mundkoch (court chef) had received from the emperor at

tournaments held earlier that year in Innsbruck.74 This implies that Maximilian allowed

members of his household staff to compete in these tournaments in one way or another;

perhaps not in the most prestigious noble jousts, but maybe in a competition among their

70 Monumenta Wormatensia, p. 397 71 Deutsche Reichstagakten, vol. 5, p. 1812. 72 Monumenta Wormatensia, p. 397. 73 Deutsche Reichstagskaten, vol. 5, p. 1810. 74 Regesta Imperii, Maximilian I., RI XIV,4,1 n. 17048a. Original source: Innsbruck, Tiroler

Landesarchiv, Geschäft von Hof 1502, fol. 154v f. Such rewards were not limited to material possessions either. In 1498, Maximilian awarded to the Hungarian brothers Georg and Wenceslaus Fuchs, for loyal service to him, a coat of arms which they could use henceforth in war or in tournaments, on their flags or shields, as well as on gravestones, seals, or rings: Regesta, Maximilian I., RI XIV,2 n. 6310. Original source: Vienna, HHSA, rrb LL, fol. 87.

219

peers, such as in the Gesellenrennen discussed earlier. And not only that but he seems to have

rewarded those who were successful with armour of their own, paid for from his own royal

funds.

Of course all of this engagement in historical tournaments and displays of physical

strength and power were only beneficial to Maximilian in the moment in which they occurred

and their immediate aftermath. He might prove himself repeatedly in the lists, thus gaining the

instant respect of his fellow German nobles, but he also realised that such success was fleeting.

Memorialising these combats in the Turnerbücher of the time allowed these feats to live on in

memoriam. The Turnierbücher of men like Johann of Saxony and Gasper Lamberger demonstrate

this desire on the part of Maximilian’s contemporaries. Maximilian went on to utilise the power

of fictional works commemorating his reign to permanently immortalise his skill in the

tournament, as discussed below. In such a way his success in the tournament could also

hopefully be seen as a symbol for his overall success as a ruler.

6.4.b Maximilian’s Tournament Network

Another way in which tournaments proved to be a most useful political tool in Maximilian’s

court was in their aid in forming networks. Maximilian’s fellow competitors in these

tournaments were also essentially a ‘who’s who’ of late medieval Germany and beyond; they

were knights and noblemen of Maximilian’s court and were also often his friends, the leaders

of his armies, and part of a tightly interwoven chivalric community which he created in his

court.75 In ruling such a vast and often disconnected empire, fostering this kind of camaraderie

75 This list would also include men already introduced, like Johann of Saxony and Gasper Lamberger, whose own Turnierbücher have been so vital to the present study. These Turnierbücher further highlighttheir connection to Maximilian and serve as a decisive statement of their close connection to him and his tournament network. In addition, Maximilian’s appearance in these books as a competitor

220

while also drawing men to him through this sporting reputation would have been a valuable

device for Maximilian.76

For example, the collection of names featured at the wedding celebrations of Wolfgang

von Polheim and the accompanying tournament (as described earlier) represent some of the

most frequent tournament competitors at Maximilian’s court; together they make up a sort of

tournament network. They also provide an excellent sample of some of the names which

appear again and again in this context. Maximilian clearly had a favoured circle of knights with

whom he enjoyed competing in a tournament setting and who were drawn to his court again

and again for this very purpose. Yet keeping these men close through the aid of tournaments

would have had greater benefits than mere recreational enjoyment. Such a practice would have

helped maintain loyalty and fidelity and also allowed Maximilian to essentially keep an eye on

the high ranking nobles and princes of his empire. Maintaining such a network in the late

medieval Holy Roman Empire would have been a difficult task. While traditionally such ties

may have been preserved by arranging marriages or holding imperial diets, Maximilian found a

way to use the tournament as a tool for the same ends.77

It is worth examining a selection of the names who were most integral to Maximilian’s

tournaments and who have appeared at various points throughout this study: who they were

and what made them so important. Many of these men were connected by blood or marriage

to Maximilian and to each other, and the number of intertwining ties between them all is

would have been a coup for their creators, granting them even greater prestige. Maximilian may be seen in Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, plates 111-112; and in The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger, pp. 150-51.

76 For more on the social and political significance of tournaments, see Bumke, Courtly Culture: Literature and Society in the High Middle Ages, pp. 264-71.

77 John Gillingham, ‘Elective Kingship and the Unity of Medieval Germany’, German History 9 (1991), pp. 124-135.

221

dizzying. Additionally, those who were most frequently found competing alongside Maximilian

tended to be very close to his age. Thus these courtly tournaments also represent a noble

German fraternity in which the competitors were the young and vital men of the empire.78

One example is Count Wolfgang of Fürstenberg. Wolfgang (c. 1465-1509) (other titles

included Landgrave of the Baar and Lord of Wolfach, Haslach, and Hausach) held close ties to

the rulers of Württemberg and to the house of Habsburg and was a highly influential man in

southwest Germany. In 1485 Wolfgang entered the service of Elector Palatine Philip.

Maximilian later knighted him at his coronation as king of the Romans in 1486. In 1490

Wolfgang took part in the siege of Hungarian-occupied Vienna alongside Maximilian, and in

1500 Maximilian appointed him to the royal council. He later acted as a commander in the

Swabian War and was named court marshal by Maximilian in 1502. At the end of the Landshut

War of Succession (1504), he served as Maximilian’s envoy in the peace negotiations with his

former lord, Elector Philip. In 1505 he at last achieved the honour of being named a knight of

the Order of the Golden Fleece. This was all achieved while being closely involved with many

of Maximilian’s tournaments (it was Wolfgang whom Maximilian reportedly knocked a lance’s

length out of the saddle at a 1502 joust).79 Wolfgang also had the honour of being depicted in

Freydal.80 The knights selected to appear in Maximilian’s commemorative, tournament-centred

work would have held a special place in his tournament circle, as their inclusion memorialised

them permanently alongside the emperor.

78 An interesting exception to this is Count Palatine of the Rhine Philip (1448-1508), the nobleman who unhorsed the newly crowned king of the Romans at his coronation in 1486, to the amusement of the spectators. Philip was eleven years Maximilian’s senior, and his defeat of the younger man, though unintentional (and something for which he was forced to apologise), seems an almost symbolic action of the older knight keeping the younger from becoming too self-assured.

79 Sanuto, I Diarii, vol. 4, pp. 217-18. 80 von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plate 17. In his introduction, von Leitner provides useful basic

biographical information on the participants who appear in the work; pp. LV-CIV.

222

An example of a younger participant in Maximilian’s tournaments is Duke Erich I of

Brunswick (1470-1540). His first wife was Katharina of Saxony, the widow of Duke Sigmund

of Austria and the daughter of Duke Albrecht of Saxony, and his second wife was Elizabeth of

Brandenburg. The godson of Maximilian, Erich was educated at the court of Duke Albrecht of

Bavaria, the son of Emperor Frederick II. He fought against the Turks as a captain in

Maximilian’s military, and he also fought in numerous campaigns for Maximilian in Venice,

Switzerland, and France. In 1504 he saved Maximilian’s life at the Battle of Augsburg, for

which Maximilian knighted him and gave him many material rewards. Later in life, however,

after the death of Maximilian, he suffered financial difficulties due to feuding with other

German lords. Erich shows up with great frequency in Maximilian’s tournaments. In 1489 he

may be found in Linz, at the tournament hosted by Frederick III and Maximilian, jousting

against Schenk Christoph von Limpurg and later against Andreas von Liechtenstein, when he

would have been only nineteen years old.81 It is tempting to imagine that Maximilian enjoyed

witnessing the potential in the younger knight.

There are also several examples of brothers who were both actively involved in

Maximilian’s tournaments. For example, the brothers Count Hans (died c. 1529) and Count

Haug (or Hugo) V (c. 1460-1519) of Montfort. The counts of Montfort were part of a German

noble dynasty from Swabia. In 1492 Emperor Frederick III bequeathed the county of

Rotenfels in Allgäu to the brothers. Both Hans and Haug appear in BSB, Cod.icon 398; Haug

competing in a tournament in Linz in 1489, and Hans competing in a joust against Maximilian

himself at a tournament in Innsbruck in 1498.82 Hans, however, appears in Freydal, while Haug

81 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 15, 27. 82 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 21, 45.

223

does not.83 There is also Elector Friedrich III of Saxony (1463-1525), known as der Weise (‘the

wise’), who was the brother of the already mentioned Elector Johann of Saxony. Friedrich

fought for imperial reform to increase the power of the nobles while reducing the power of the

emperor, and in 1500 he became president of the Reichsregiment (imperial governing council).

He was later even offered the imperial crown, but he refused and went on to help to secure it

for Maximilian’s grandson, Charles V, instead. Like Maximilian, he was a patron of Albrecht

Dürer and Lucas Cranach the Elder, as well as a friend of Georg Spalatin, and in 1502 he

founded the University of Wittenberg. And, like his brother Johann, Friedrich competed

against Maximilian in many tournaments. He may be seen in BSB, Cod.icon 398 jousting

against the emperor in Innsbruck in 1497.84 Interestingly, Friedrich appears in Freydal, while

Johann does not.85

Finally, there are two especially interesting individuals: Wolfgang von Polheim (1458-

1512) and Anthony von Yfan. It was von Polheim whose marriage to Johanna von Borsselen

in Mechlin was the occasion of a great tournament. Von Polheim came from one of the oldest

and noblest Upper Austrian noble families, and he held the title of Oberster Hauptmann in

Lower Austria.86 He was a companion of Maximilian’s from childhood and his trusted friend

and counselor.87 Von Polheim was even a captive alongside Maximilian in Bruges in 1488. He

was closely involved in Maximilian’s diplomatic affairs and attempted to help bring about the

proposed marriage between Maximilian and Anna of Brittany, acting as Maximilian’s stand-in

83 von Leitner, ed, Freydal, plate 125. 84 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 39. 85 von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 157, 204, 208. 86 Like the counts von Montfort, and Friedrich and Johann of Saxony, Wolfgang’s brother,

Weikhard, may also be found in Maximilian’s tournaments, and he jousted at his brother’s wedding. 87 Some of von Polheim’s own armour (manufactured in Innsbruck, c. 1510) may be seen in the

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (Inv. Nr. A 107).

224

in the marriage by proxy. In 1500 he became a knight of the Golden Fleece. In addition to his

numerous appearances both in Freydal and in Maximilian’s historical tournaments, von Polheim

has a special place of prominence: he features as Rennen und Gestech Meister (‘Master of the

Rennen and Gestech) in Maximilian’s Triumphzug. There he bears a banner in which reads:

‘Always promoting new advances / In jousting with hooked or pointed lances, / Thanks to

His Highness [Maximilian], I [von Polheim] unfurled / Skills never seen in all the world.’88

Maximilian’s tournament network was not made up entirely of German noblemen

either. Anthony von Yfan (died c. 1510), as he is commonly named in German sources, was, in

fact, the Italian nobleman Antonio de Caldonazo, the baron of Ivano. He was the son of

Jacobus de Caldonazo and Laura della Volpe de Vicenza, and he was married to Apollonia von

Winden. In 1490 he was named as a royal councillor, and in 1498 von Yfan, along with his

brother Hans, was granted care of the courts of the Tyrolean town of Landeck by Maximilian.

At the court of Maximilian von Yfan played a central role as a competitor in his tournaments.

Maximilian seems to have particularly enjoyed jousting against the Italian. In BSB, Cod.icon

398, von Yfan appears five times, in three of which he is jousting with Maximilian, and he

features extensively in Freydal.89 At Wolfgang von Polheim’s wedding, von Yfan was

considered to have emerged the victor in the celebratory tournament.90 Most significantly, like

von Polheim, von Yfan also appears in Maximilian’s Triumphzug, where he is described as the

Turniermeister (‘Master of the Tournament’) and carries a banner stating, ‘Much of his

[Maximilian’s] time was nobly spent / In the true knightly tournament, / A source of valour

88 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, pp. 7-8/plate 44. Von Polheim appears in von. Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 34, 62, 66, 86, 89, 126, 137, 161, 212, and 221.

89 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plates 19, 26, 31, 37, and 53. Von Yfan appears in von Leitner, ed., Freydal, plates 43, 45, 101, 105, 129, 193, and 232.

90 Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, pp. 230-31.

225

and elation; / Therefore upon his instigation, / With knightly spirit and bold heart / I [von

Yfan] have improved this fighting art’.91

Maximilian bestowed upon these two men the immense honour of immortalising them

forever in one of his own personal literary works. They may now forever be associated

specifically with Maximilian’s tournaments, and his high regard for their skill in that context is

reflected in such an honour. Who else may have held the positions during Maximilian’s reign is

unknown. However, the very existence of these two official court positions speaks to the value

Maximilian placed on the tournament. He placed two men in charge of upholding his own

rules, and the words he put in their mouths in the form of the banners they carry reflect not

only the advances made to the tournament by Maximilian but also von Polheim’s and von

Yfan’s places of importance in Maximilian’s tournament network.

6.4.c Maximilian and his Fictional Tournaments

Maximilian’s utilisation of the tournament in his courtly culture was not always strictly limited

to real-life events. In fact, fictional tournaments could often play as important a part in how

Maximilian wished to portray his court as those which truly took place there. In the fictional

realm, Maximilian could entirely control the outcome of every tournament or frame himself as

the hero of every joust.92 As Gosman states, ‘[I]t is not surprising to see propaganda and

panegyrics present princely authority as if it were total, complete and non-contested: whatever

the prince wants to do, he is allowed to do. […] The question of whether this kind of

91 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, p. 7/plate 41. For further information on von Yfan, see Die Inschriften des Bundeslandes Tirol, Teil 1, ed. by Werner Köfler and Romedio Schmitz-Esser (Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2003), Die Deutschen Inschriften 82.

92 See, van Dyke, ‘The Literary Activity of the Emperor Maximilian I’, pp. 16-28, and William McDonald, German medieval literary patronage from Charlemagne to Maximilian I: A critical commentary with special emphasis on imperial promotion of literature (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1973).

226

propagandistic assertiveness is motivated by political reality or by abstract theory is irrelevant:

rulers want their virtual realities to be confirmed, and they are not interested at all in having

true realities discussed’.93 This idea ties into Müller’s theory that Maximilian wanted to present

his court through his propaganda as he wished or imagined that it was, rather than his

financially strained reality.94

Paula Fichtner, among others, rightly questions where Maximilian drew the line

between reality and fantasy in the images he presented of himself. This speaks of a boundless

self-assurance. Yet he would have needed such a thing to succeed in the role he had been born

into. When it comes to Maximilian, there was his authentic self and the self he presented in art

and literature.95 Connected to this, Müller points out that Maximilians’s self-representations

were not original but fit into certain long-standing models: i.e. student, commander, ruler,

artist. But this does not mean they were all necessarily true.96 This desire to present himself as

part of a long-standing literary tradition of glorifying rulers comes to the fore in the trilogy of

Weisskunig, Theuerdank, and Freydal: As Gerhild Williams neatly puts it,

The three autobiographic narratives […] link Maximilian’s experiences and all the stations of his eventful life to the universal order of all things. All that is confusing, dangerous, and negative is transformed into a meaningful commentary on the life of the hero who appears in three different roles: emblematically the color white stands for the innocent, peerless, also the wise king; the one who thinks high and worthy thoughts is Theuerdank, and the one who joyfully, freydig, pursues the path of courtly honor is, of course, Freydal.97

93 Gosman, ‘Princely Culture: Friendship or Patronage?’, pp. 6-7. In much the same vein, Gosman also states, ‘Factual truth is ignored in propaganda and replaced by a more desirable vision of reality. Princely power is never unlimited; instead, propaganda is relied upon to smooth over any imperfections or shortcomings’, pp. 19-20.

94 Müller, Gedechtnus: Literatur und Hofgesellschaft um Maximilian I. 95 Fichtner, The Habsburgs: Dynasty, Culture and Politics, pp. 32-33. 96 Müller, Gedechtnus: Literatur und Hofgesellschaft um Maximilian I., p. 264. 97 Williams, ‘The Arthurian Model in Emperor Maximilian's Autobiographic Writings Weisskunig

and Theuerdank’, p. 4. Williams also points out that, ‘As is genre-specific to autobiographic writings, the

227

The three works strike a balance between allegory and true history which allowed Maximilian

to present only the best aspects of himself.

An excellent case study for the role of tournaments in Maximilian’s literary heritage is

Theuerdank, the allegorical re-telling of Maximilian’s courtship of his beloved first wife, Mary of

Burgundy, and part of what Elaine C. Tennant calls ‘the Maximilian industry’.98 Given the

significance of tournaments in both the Burgundian and German court, it is little surprise that

tournaments should hold a prominent place in Theuerdank. Yet these individual encounters

reflect, in fact, far more the legacy of German tournaments which Maximilian hoped to leave

behind at the end of his life rather than the Burgundian-style tournaments which he might

have encountered at Mary’s court during their actual marriage in 1477.

In Theuerdank, in order to win his bride, the young Theuerdank (i.e. Maximilian) must

compete in three days of combat with knights in the court of the maiden Ehrenreich (i.e. Mary

of Burgundy). Each of these three days of combat in which Theuerdank is involved follows a

similar format. There is always a joust, followed by a foot combat, and the day ends with

dancing. This is a format similar to that seen in another of Maximilian’s autobiographical yet

allegorical works, Freydal, which is devoted in its entirety to the tournaments which Maximilian

so loved. Thus the audience can see Maximilian, as the originator of these works, aligning the

organisation of his tournaments across the sources representing his reign.

The first joust in which Theuerdank competes takes the form of a Scharfrennen,

probably the most popular form of the Rennen practised in Maximilian’s day and one far more

Weisskunig changes the chaos of a life to a well planned matrix of cosmic order and to a logical motivational mechanism which controls all facets of Maximilian’s turbulent life’, p.7. Such a statement could easily apply to any of Maximilian’s commemorative autobiographical works.

98 Elaine C. Tennant, ‘Productive Reception: Theuerdank in the Sixteenth Century’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I., p. 295.

228

closely associated with German than Burgundian tournaments. Theuerdank and his opponent

compete in a clearly designated arena, each clad in a Rennzeug, the suit of armour designed for

the Rennen-style jousts. The Scharfrennen can consistently be identified as such by the style of

armour used and the use of pointed as opposed to blunted lances.99

Another source with unmistakable similarities to the tournaments of Theuerdank is BSB,

Cod.icon 398. An illustration of Maximilian himself participating in a Scharfrennen at a

tournament in Nuremberg in 1491 appears in this work.100 Except that this manuscript is not a

representation of Maximilian as the allegorical hero, but a historical record of the ruler taking

part in an actual tournament. An examination of the German-style armour and equipment

used, however, reveals an equivalence to the supposedly Burgundian-set tournament of

Theuerdank.

On the second day Theuerdank engages in a Welschgestech, a style of joust also very

much associated with Maximilian and his legacy. Here Theuerdank is described as wearing a

welschen stechzeug, a variety of the Stechzeug, the armour worn by German knights in the Gestech.101

There is one notable feature about this joust: while also taking place in an enclosed area, unlike

the previous woodcut of the first joust, this one includes a tilt dividing the two knights. The tilt

was the primary identifying feature of the Welschgestech. Its inclusion in Theuerdank is an

interesting conundrum. Whether or not Maximilian first encountered the Welschgestech in the

Burgundian court upon his marriage to Mary, or in the Italian court upon his marriage to

Bianca Maria Sforza, its inclusion in Theuerdank, placed between two distinctly German forms

of joust, shows how Maximilian was now claiming it as his own.

99 Die Geferlicheiten und geschichten des löblichen streytbaren unnd hochberiempten Helds und Ritters Teürdancks (Augsburg: Stainer, 1537), p. 493.

100 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon 398, plate 49. 101 Teürdancks (1537), p. 501.

229

The third day brings a Deutschgestech, the classic form of the German joust with blunted

lances.102 Like the Scharfrennen, this is most popular form of the Gestech from Maximilian’s court.

By the end of the third day Theuerdank (perhaps unsurprisingly) has emerged victorious from

each of his combats. Afterward the young queen (Mary) then greets him and, taking his hands,

says, Ir habt eur macht wol bewert, or ‘You have truly proved your power’, and further names him

‘the noblest hero on the earth’ because of his accomplishments. There could be no clearer

connection established between Theuerdank, i.e. Maximilian’s, reputation as a ruler and the

importance he placed on success in tournaments.103

Theuerdank was first printed in 1517, many decades after Maximilian’s marriage to Mary

in 1477 and just two years before his death in 1519. Its mix of text and woodcut engravings is

a wonderful example of a late medieval monarch harnessing the new power of printing.

Maximilian was cleverly using this new technology as a tool to help craft his future legacy. It is

the reason why Maximilian favoured woodcuts and pictures: because they were relatively

inexpensive and could be multiplied and distributed rapidly, rather than art by famous painters

or sculptors. Maximilian also knew that he could make his printed works more popular by

adding images.104

Theuerdank was Maximilian’s way of commemorating his marriage to Mary as one of

the most significant events of his life. His ties to Burgundy were, at the end of his life, the ones

which he most wanted to honour. Yet he did so in a way which incorporated his own

subsequent accomplishments as well, by retroactively inserting the German-style tournaments

of his court into a Burgundian setting. One interesting example of the way these two factors

102 Teürdancks (1537), p. 508. 103 Teürdancks (1537), p. 516. 104 Waas, The Legendary Character of Kaiser Maximilian, pp. 118-19.

230

combine in the Theuerdank tournaments is that the hero, Maximilian, is gifted armour from the

‘Burgundian’ armouries by Ehrenreich in which to compete. This could be seen as a highly

literal representation of the blending of the two cultures – Theuerdank is undertaking German

tournaments in Burgundian armour.105 The choice of the three varieties of mounted joust

depicted is also significant. They represent the two most quintessentially German – and most

popular under Maximilian – forms of the Rennen and the Gestech: the Scharfrennen and the

Deutschgestech. The third, the Welschgestech, is representative of one of Maximilian’s most

favoured and unique forms of joust which he promoted.

As a monarch Maximilian undoubtedly wished to emulate the famous tournaments of

Mary’s father, Charles the Bold - a man whom he greatly admired - in the court of Burgundy.

As has previously been discussed, the impressive tournaments held at the Burgundian court

were already famous in Maximilian’s day, and he would have been well aware of their

reputation. Theuerdank may be Maximilian’s way of drawing a parallel between his own

tournaments and those of the Burgundian father-in-law whom he idolised, while also

emphasising the German forms and innovations of his own competitions and, by extension,

building his own legacy on top of that of Burgundy. In its literary re-telling, Maximilian also

gets to portray himself as the unequivocal hero, saving the damsel in distress, Mary, just as he

saved her inheritance from the perceived threat of France, all brought to life in the true

Arthurian model.106

105 Teürdancks (1537), p. 490. 106 Williams, ‘The Arthurian Model in Emperor Maximilian's Autobiographic Writings Weisskunig

and Theuerdank’, pp. 9-10. For more on concept of adventure as found in Theuerdank, see Bianca Häberlein, ‘Die Konzeption des Abenteuers im 'Wilhelm von Österreich' Johanns von Würzburg und im Theuerdank Maximilians I.’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I., pp. 281-94.

231

Gerhild Williams calls Maximilian his own propaganda minister – someone who

carefully constructed his public image in order to achieve his goals. Throughout his reign

Maximilian wanted to assert his political power over other rulers, such as those of England and

France.107 When he was unsuccessful in doing this in real-life, he could at least do it in literary

form. This method has earned him both respect and disdain from modern historians. Paul van

Dyke, for instance, vigorously condemned Maximilian’s (admittedly undeniable) vanity. He

claims that his works lack any artistic knowledge or literary ability; rather they are simply the

result of a tremendous effort to produce an enormous volume of work. There is nothing

worth praising in the form or content.108

These works’ veracity is certainly worth questioning. Weisskunig’s portrayal of

Maximilian’s thorough and wide ranging education, for instance, is undoubtedly dubious. The

young prince’s education would in all likelihood have been meagre, due to the financial

difficulties faced by Frederick III and the empire at that time.109 However, their impact in how

Maximilian’s public image has been crafted is undeniable. When such works are the most easily

accessible and widespread sources relating to Maximilian’s reign, thanks to the power of

printing, their mission must have been successful.

6.5 Conclusions

In his court, Maximilian created for himself a unique environment by making use of a type of

Kulturtransfer; he combinined elements of Burgundian, Italian, and Austro-German courtly

culture to create his own ‘melting pot’. Some elements were absorbed; some were in part

107 Williams, ‘The Arthurian Model in Emperor Maximilian's Autobiographic Writings Weisskunig and Theuerdank’, p. 6.

108 van Dyke, Paul, ‘The Literary Activity of the Emperor Maximilian I’, p. 17. 109 Cuyler, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music, pp. 8-9.

232

transformed into something new.110 Throughout his reign Maximilian’s connection to the

tournament appears threefold: Maximilian consistently demonstrates in the running of his

court a combination of true enjoyment of the tournament and, at the same time, an

understanding of its important role in his court, as well as a consciousness of its place in his

legacy.

Firstly, Maximilian, by all accounts, very much enjoyed taking part in tournaments,

both in forms of foot combat and also on horseback, as a participant. This is shown in the

examples above, where Maximilian is often described as ‘happy’ while taking part in a

tournament. This enjoyment of the tournament led him to pursue it well into middle age and

to continue to prove himself a fit competitor. This would have been particularly useful during

times when Maximilian was viewed as lacking in other dimensions as a leader – in the political

arena, for instance. Showing himself off as a an adept tournament competitor allowed

Maximilian to display his chivalric prowess, something always sure to gain a medieval ruler

respect, even when he may not prove himself in other ways. Although, as also seen above, this

passionate pursuit of the tournament could sometimes come at the expense of his political

success. This was a double-edged sword which Maximilian dealt with throughout his reign. Yet

certainly the tournament was a more politically useful recreational pursuit than one of

Maximilian’s other great loves, hunting, which did not have the added benefit of taking place

within the court and in front of an audience.

For, secondly, Maximilian was clearly aware of the power of the tournament as a focal

point of courtly activity. He demonstrates over and over numerous ways in which he

incorporates tournaments into courtly festivities – at weddings or other celebrations – and

110 Brandstätter, ‘Aspekte der Festkultur unter Maximilian’, pp. 163-65.

233

brings them heavily into the revelries of the Fastnacht period on a regular basis. Not only did

these tournaments provide pleasing entertainment to the ladies of the court and other

spectators, but they also provided a space for other princes and high-ranking nobles of

Maximilian’s empire to come together for friendly competition. They could show off and build

their chivalric reputations while, hopefully, gaining a respect and appreciation for Maximilian’s

hospitality, and he, in turn, could keep an eye on them and maintain valuable friendships. They

acted as a unifying force in bringing together nobles across his disparate empire. The

tournament possessed a sort of universal appeal which would have brought knights to

Maximilian’s court for the pleasure of competing, no matter what city he found himself in. Yet

they were also still a way for Maximilian to assert his own power as a skilled competitor and to

win the respect of foreign noblemen, such as Claude de Vauldrey.

Thirdly, in Maximilian’s eyes his court was not just the social world which he built

around him; it was also, in many instances, a theoretical, idealised space which could be used in

crafting his image. This court had the power to exist perpetually, preserved forever in art and

literature. The role of memory as it relates to the courtly tournament is a critical one to

Maximilian. This may be seen in the commemoration of real-life tournaments in which

Maximilian was involved through the medium of the Turnierbücher, a genre which he and many

of his contemporaries popularised. It may also be seen in the prominent place of fictional

tournaments in works like Theuerdank. In each of these literary or artistic works tournaments

are placed, either subtly or obviously, in a central or critical role.

It is also important to note that Maximilian himself had a hand in producing these

works, proving that his passion for the tournament was a central factor he wished to

emphasise in his public persona. In each of these works Maximilian is casting himself as the

central character – a knight of the noblest chivalric standards and, above all, a superb

234

competitor in the tournament. He is intentionally harking back to earlier medieval tales of

heroic knights and is attempting to both embody and carry forward this tradition in his own

lifetime and beyond. Both chivalry and honour were, naturally, integral to the world of

tournament, a stage on which the highest ideals of knightly ethics could be played out.

Maximilian threw himself into this idea, already romanticising ‘chivalry’ in much the same way

as happens today. And he often set himself in centre stage, both in the actual events and in

their literary representations.

The importance of the tournament in Maximilian’s court cannot be overstated.

Although it may be seen in a negative (as a distraction from imperial duties) or a positive (as a

form of pleasing entertainment) light, Maximilian throughout his life showed himself to be a

devotee of the tournament far surpassing other rulers of his time. He incorporated it in a

variety of ingenious ways into his courtly life – across many locations, times, purposes, and

even artistic mediums. He also demonstrated an awareness of how it might affect his future

reputation. As a vital part of courtly life which has heretofore been largely overlooked or

incorporated into other studies, the tournament deserves full focus as a key element of

Maximilian’s reign.

235

Conclusions

Centuries of scholarship, art and literature have left us multiple Maximilians to ponder and to reconcile. For some he was the creative force that set off the ascent of his house to world prominence, for others a German emperor who fatefully conflated the welfare of the German Nation with the interests of his dynasty and his flamboyant constructions of himself. Others have celebrated his lavish patronage of learning, art, and music that would make Vienna a cultural capital in the centuries to come. Still others see him as a conventional Renaissance prince, brutal when he punished, reckless when he spent, deplorably self-indulgent when he pursued game and fish that might have been feeding his often resentful peasantry. Historians have had an especially hard time periodizing the man. Was Maximilian an avatar of things to come or an anachronistic medievaliser?1

This quotation from Paula Fichtner succinctly captures many of the contradictions central to

Maximilian’s character. Maximilian was in many respects not the most successful medieval

monarch. Yet in other ways his forward thinking helped to secure his lasting place in history.

In each of these often contradictory facets, tournaments played a role. Maximilian’s

‘flamboyant constructions of himself’ often centred on tournaments, as reflected by his ‘lavish

patronage’ of various artistic and literary projects. His ‘self-indulgent’ nature and ‘reckless’

spending also often manifested itself in a pursuit of tournaments when other matters of greater

importance required his attention. His tournaments also are, in their innovative form and

elaborate spectacle, the perfect manifestation of Maximilian’s desire to be an ‘avatar of things

to come’, while also, in their focus on chivalry and mimicry of Burgundian culture, a symbol of

his nostalgic desire to be an ‘anachronistic medievaliser’.

Several historical factors, some of which can be put down to the pure luck of

Maximilian’s time and place of birth, allowed him to craft the tournament-centred legacy which

1 Fichtner, The Habsburgs: Dynasty, Culture and Politics, p. 31.

236

he did. For one, he was able to employ some of the most skilled armourers of the time, such as

the Helmschmieds or Konrad Seusenhofer. Their workshops in Innsbruck and Augsburg

produced for Maximilian some of the most exquisitely crafted tournament armour possible,

and his patronage in turn allowed them to do so. This armour, which plays a central role in

numerous visual sources and in particular the Turnierbücher, enabled Maximilian to host and

participate in the elaborate tournaments which he did. Outside of the world of tournaments,

Maximilian’s patronage of these workshops and his passion for innovation in the field of

armour manufacturing led to the distinctive appearance of sixteenth century German armours

becoming known as ‘Maximilian style’ – another way in which Maximilian left his mark.

There was also the serendipitous fact that printing in the late fifteenth and early

sixteenth centuries was being fully realised as a powerful tool for those who knew how to

utilise it. Maximilian, as has been shown throughout this study, took advantage of this new

technology in many ways. As Waas puts it, ‘‘Maximilian’s ambition to write his own chapter in

history is evident in nearly all of his public expressions’.2 Throughout his reign Maximilian

showed a keen self-awareness when it came to the crafting of his own legacy, and his literary

output reflects this. Freydal, Theuerdank, and Weißkunig all show the young king performing

chivalrous deeds. In addition to these works, one could also take as examples the Jagdbuch: a list

of his hunting preserves (in which he refers to himself as the ‘Great Huntsman’), the

Fischereibuch: a volume of his royal fishing preserves, the Zeugbücher: an inventory of his

armouries, and also a family Genealogie, as well as the Triumphzug. Even his elaborate Grabmal in

Innsbruck, although he was never buried there, stands as an example of the emperor’s

forward-thinking.

2 Waas, The Legendary Character of Kaiser Maximilian, p. 98.

237

Yet these fortuitous historical coincidences would have remained just that, if not for

Maximilian’s ability to harness and take advantage of them. There are several ways to interpret

this endless quest for immortality by the emperor. Van Dyke, for one, has stated his belief that

the primary focus of Maximilian’s literary output was bragging. Each of these works, according

to him, only exist to show off Maximilian’s skill, education, leadership, piety, knowledge, and

charity. Van Dyke takes the rather unforgiving and simplistic view that ‘Maximilian was firmly

convinced that he could do almost everything better than anybody alive, better than all but a

few of those who were dead […] Every book in which he took any interest is either a record of

his deeds, a catalogue of his possessions or an exhortation to his descendants to base their

greatness on his example.’3 This belief that Maximilian’s sole object was fame and that he

always exclusively sought out self-glorification, is certainly justified, and this judgement could

easily be applied to the emperor’s approach to tournaments. The primary focus of works like

Weißkunig and Theuerdank, after all, was not to show Maximilian as he was but as he wished to

appear to history.

Yet throughout these works Maximilian shows a desire not just to glorify himself but

to glorify his court. He did not see himself as ‘the best’ at everything he undertook to do, but

rather he wished to convey an image of well-rounded prosperity and success, applicable to

himself as an individual and to his court as well. These pursuits were also helped by

Maximilian’s seemingly boundless and restless energy. He flung himself into his literary

pursuits while surrounding himself with scholars and artists. Van Dyke relates an anecdote

from Willibald Pirckheimer (d. 1530), a German jurist and humanist: while crossing Lake

Constance on the Rhine in Maximilian’s company in 1499, Pirckheimer claimed that

3 van Dyke, ‘The Literary Activity of the Emperor Maximilian I’, p. 16.

238

Maximilian spent the part of the voyage dictating his autobiography in Latin.4 Although the

veracity of this tale is questionable, it serves as a demonstration of how, as a ruler, Maximilian

was known to be endlessly productive.

Finally, there was the fact that during Maximilian’s lifetime the tournament was at a

critical point in its history where it was increasingly losing its relevance as a form of military

training, but its capacity for theatre was being newly mined. In many ways Maximilian could be

said to have used the tournament as a form of propaganda.5 He found various ways to use the

tournament as a tool: a vehicle for displaying the power of his court, a unifying event to bring

together his subjects (both noble and non-noble), and a venue for himself to show off his

chivalric skills in the lists. As explained previously, Maximilian ruled over a vast and culturally

varied empire, and, amongst the many devices and methods he used to maintain control over

his territories, whether diplomatic, military, or benevolent, tournaments should not be

overlooked as a key weapon in his propagandistic arsenal.6

Maximilian made use of the tournament as a form of propaganda in two ways. First, he

used the tournaments which took place in reality at his court often as a means of showing off

both his affluence and, critically, his own virility as a competitor within them. These events

were a chance for him to display wealth and prosperity or to portray his court as the beating

4 van Dyke, ‘The Literary Activity of the Emperor Maximilian I’, pp. 18-20. 5 Darin Hayton, in his study of the role of astrology in Maximilian’s court, provides a clear

explanation of the usefulness of the word ‘propaganda’ in a medieval context, before the concept had been explicitly defined, and justifies its use in his study. As Hayton puts it, ‘[T]he absence of the term [propaganda] in the early sixteenth century does not mean that early modern princes and audiences failed to recognize attempts at persuasion’. This same explanation applies as easily to the role of tournaments as it does to astrology. Hayton, The Crown and the Cosmos: Astrology and the Politics of Maximilian I, pp. 4-6 (4).

6 ‘As soon as the illiterate or the uneducated accept the basic principle that their country is superior to others, and that the dynasty in power is the best thing that could happen to them, propaganda has achieved its aim’: Gosman, ‘Princely Culture: Friendship or Patronage?’, p. 19. This explanation, while blunt, encapsulates Maximilian’s ultimate goal.

239

heart of his empire and him as its undefeatable ruler. By staging these events in town squares

across his empire, and by crafting a close-knit tournament network around himself, Maximilian

mastered the art of self-promotion. Yet Maximilian did not limit himself to tournaments in

reality. The tournament often played a central role in his literary legacy, and fictional

tournaments served to memorialise the emperor’s court and ensure its fame down the

centuries.

Maximilian further found new ways to utilise spectacle and pageantry in his

tournaments. One need only look to the Triumphzug to see the obvious importance Maximilian

placed on the tournament in the context of his court; the varieties of joust are presented there

as of equal importance to any of his other courtly accomplishments such as music or military

might. The clearest example of how central tournaments were to court life is the fact that

Maximilian devised at least two court positions devoted to the tournament: Rennen und Gestech

Meister and Turniermeister (Wolfgang von Polheim and Anthony von Yfan, respectively).7 Their

presence also shows an interest by the emperor in properly cataloguing the different varieties

of joust featured in the Triumphzug. It shows an appreciation of the importance of the language

of the tournament and the terminology which he wished to use in memorialising these

competitions.

Evidence of his success may be found in the fact that, in his own time Maximilian and

his tournaments had a great influence on younger rulers, especially Henry VIII of England.

Their close relationship is reflected in a letter from the English ambassador Robert Wingfield

to his master, King Henry. Wingfield reported Maximilian as saying to him, ‘I desire you to

make my most hearty and affectuous recommendations unto my most dear and well beloved

7 Appelbaum, ed., The Triumph of Maximilian, p. 7-8/plates 41, 44.

240

brother, the King your master, which by word doth call me father; and I do call him son,

which I do take right gladly upon me’.8 This father/son-style relationship, as it is presented

here, also manifested itself in several gift exchanges in the form of armour. In 1514 Maximilian

gifted to Henry a suit of armour which included a highly unique horned parade helmet made

by his favoured armourer Konrad Seusenhofer.9 In addition, Maximilian also gifted Henry the

so-called Burgundian bard (c. 1510), a luxurious horse armour decorated with pomegranates, a

personal symbol of both Maximilian and Henry’s first wife, Katherine of Aragon.10 These two

rulers seemed to have had a shared interest in chivalric culture as represented by fine suits of

armour and spectacular tournaments. In Henry’s own tournaments, as commemorated in the

Westminster Tournament Roll (1511), or even the Field of Cloth of Gold (1520) – possibly the

most famous tournament of all time – we may see a reflection of the pageantry of Maximilian’s

own court.

In such ways Maximilian’s influence on the tournament continued to be felt directly

after his lifetime. As the tournament, and specifically the joust, continued to evolve and

became even less viable as a form of either military training or entertainment, gradually being

replaced by more pacific events like running at the ring or formal carousels, Maximilian still

made his impact felt, even after his death.11 The Hans Burgkmair tournament images originally

presented in the Triumphzug, in particular, were re-issued in various forms and editions in the

8 Wingfield, quoted in Chisholm, ‘Robert Wingfield: English Ambassador to the Holy Roman Empire (1510-1517)’, p. 75.

9 Leeds, UK, Royal Armouries, Object Number IV.22. 10 Leeds, UK, Royal Armouries, Object Number VI.6. 11 An example of how the German tournament evolved and its gradual transition in emphasis to

more benign forms of competition, particularly tilting at the ring, can be seen in Georg Rodolf Weckherlin, Triumphall shevvs set forth lately at Stutgart. Written first in German, and now in English by G. Rodolfe Weckherlin, secretarie to the Duke of Wirtemberg (Stuttgart: John-Wyrich Resslin, 1616), Early English Books Online: from a copy in the British Library, London.

241

decades after Maximilian’s death. His effort to properly define and categorise forms of the

German joust evidently had a wide-ranging appeal. A variation on these unmistakable images

are also included in a fighting manual, De Arte Athletica, by the Augsburg aristocrat Paulus

Hector Mair (1517-1579). This two volume manuscript (c. 1540s) includes treatises on an

abundance of forms of combat, including fencing, wrestling, and fighting with staff weapons.

It also features an extensive section on the German tournament dedicated ad aeternam memoriam

divi Maximiliani Romanorum Imperatoris, Casaris, et Augsusti.12 In this work, Maximilian is directly

credited with establishing the glory of the German tournament; his name has become linked

with the pastime.

The same phenomenon can be seen in the introductory plate to a mid-seventeenth

century partial edition of the Triumphzug, which reads, ‘Hereafter are following, dedicated to

the Most Worshipful memory of the late Most Illustrious and Great Mightiest Prince and

Lord, Maximilian First of his Name, Holy Roman Emperor, etc, sundry knightly games that

were in part invented and regulated by His Majesty himself and every so often made use of by

His Majesty for pastime and entertainment.’13 Over a century after his death Maximilian’s

reputation as lover of, participant in, and designer of the tournament was firmly set in place;

here he is directly credited with ‘inventing’ and ‘regulating’ the tournament. In the Triumphzug

Maximilian had found a way to guarantee his legacy and to share with future generations those

things of which he was most proud, and being an architect of the tournament was key among

these.

12 Munich, BSB, Cod.icon. 393(2, De arte athletica II, plate 194. 13 New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 22.229, Album of Tournaments and Parades in

Nuremberg, plate 3.

242

And indeed, in the centuries after his death, just as he desired, Maximilian was

remarkably successful in his efforts to place tournaments at the heart of his legacy. This is

exemplified in some particularly interesting ways, of which his encounter with Claude de

Vauldrey in Worms in 1495 is a good case study. This famed encounter transformed into

almost a legend as the story passed down and grew over the years. One rather romantic

account of it found its way into the nineteenth-century work, Memoirs of the Court, Aristocracy,

and Diplomacy of Austria, by Carl Eduard Vehse, who claimed:

When he [Maximilian] held the first Diet at Worms, the French knight Claude de Barre, a man of gigantic strength, hung out his shield from the window of his inn, challenging all the Germans to single combat. Maximilian then had the arms of Austria and Burgundy hung by the side of the shield of the Frenchman, whom he conquered with the sword, after the lances of both had glanced from the cuirasses.1

This account, although far from factually accurate, shows the impression the encounter

between these two famous knights – one of an older and one of a younger generation – made

upon the German people and how it passed down through the centuries, adding to

Maximilian’s chivalrous image – that of ‘the Last Knight’.

In the same vein, a series of prints published in 1824 claimed to depict the tournament

at Worms. This sensational and highly romanticised series of images bears no resemblance to

historical reality. The introduction falsely claims that the imperial diet took place in 1487, and

that there, in fact, Maximilian held the last ever German tournament.2 The accompanying

images show men in anachronistic armour, including winged and horned helmets most

1 Carl Eduard Vehse, Memoirs of the Court, Aristocracy, and Diplomacy of Austria, trans. by Franz Demmler (London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1856), vol. 1, p. 8.

2 Das Turnier zu Worms in plastischer Aufstellung mit Figuren, Versetzstücken und Oertlichkeiten in kleinen und grossen Cartons (Vienna: M. Trentsensky, c. 1824), p. 6.

243

commonly associated with nineteenth century myths of the Vikings.3 It is in many ways

charming in its inaccuracy and, while a wholly unreliable historical source, still represents the

hold over the imagination which Maximilian’s tournaments had on a nineteenth century

audience.

This legacy has continued on and flourished into the present day in other (more

historically accurate) ways. Recent museum exhibitions like that held at the Reiss Engelhorn

Museum in Mannheim entirely dedicated to Maximilian and the courtly tournament are proof

of this.4 Yet, despite the role of tournaments circling around the periphery of Maximilian

studies for many years, the lack of an expansive study solely focused on this subject has left a

wide gap in the scholarship, which this thesis has attempted to, at least partially, fill.

While the current study has explored the topic of tournaments and Maximilian, it has

also brought up many questions which warrant further research yet which were outside its

scope. For example, this thesis has focused almost exclusively on the joust alone and its

significance in Maximilian’s tournaments. An in-depth study of the place of foot combat in

Maximilian’s tournaments would also be worthwhile. Furthermore, while numerous studies of

tournament arms and armour exist, none have been devoted solely to tournament textiles,

discussed in Chapter 5 of this thesis but worthy of a much larger and wider ranging

investigation. Also, this thesis has incorporated where relevant the tournaments of other

knights of Maximilian’s court and their involvement in Maximilian’s own tournaments.

However, many of these could be the subject of their own study, which would in turn continue

to add to the greater understanding of late medieval German tournaments.

3 See Appendix 1, Figure 36. 4 Kaiser Maximilian I: Der letzte Ritter und das höfische Turnier, ed. by Sabine Haag, Alfried Wieczorek,

Matthias Pfaffenbichler, and Hans-Jürgen Buderer.

244

The findings of this project have shown the many and varied ways Maximilian’s

personal history is intertwined with the history of the tournament. It has done so by exploring

the evidence presented in a wide range of sources, specifically: narrative, visual, Maximilian’s

personal works, and material culture. Each of these category of source provides a new lens

through which to view Maximilian’s tournaments, and together they create a new picture

which has never before been fully drawn. Using these sources, this study has examined

Maximilian’s life as a whole and located occurrences of tournaments within it across a variety

of times and places while also establishing their place in the larger events of his life. Taking a

closer look at the makeup of the tournament itself, it has scrutinised the individual forms of

joust which Maximilian both practiced and promoted. Connected to this, it has analysed the

equipment used in the joust, both practical and decorative. Finally, this study has also explored

the many roles the tournament played in Maximilian’s courtly life, including its purpose and

the occasions which warranted such an event, some of the dangers associated with it, and

Maximilian’s own place within it. These discoveries have painted the picture of a man

passionate about the tournament, keenly aware of his place in history, and clever enough to use

the one to guarantee the other.

245

Appendix 1: Images

Figure 1: Map of Maximilian’s Holy Roman Empire

246

Figure 2: Maximilian’s Lehrbuch

Figure 3: Jousting Figurines in Weißkunig

247

Figure 4: Tourneyers in the Triumphzug

Figure 5: Tourneyers in the Turnierbuch of Ludwig von Eyb

248

Figure 6: Tourneyers in the Turnierbuch of Marx Walther

Figure 7: Tourneyers in BSB, Cod.icon 398

249

Figure 8: The Deutschgestech in the Triumphzug

Figure 9: The Welschgestech in Freydal

250

Figure 10: The Welschgestech in the Triumphzug

Figure 11: The Hohes Zeug

251

Figure 12: The Hohenzeuggestech in Freydal

Figure 13: The Hohenzeuggestech in the Triumphzug

252

Figure 14: The Gestech im Beinharnisch in the Triumphzug

Figure 15: The Welschrennen in the Triumphzug

253

Figure 16: The Geschiftrennen in the Triumphzug

Figure 17: The Scheibenrennen in the Triumphzug

254

Figure 18: The Schweifrennen in the Triumphzug

Figure 19: The Bundrennen in the Triumphzug

255

Figure 20: The Feldrennen in the Triumphzug

Figure 21: The Wulstrennen in the Triumphzug

256

Figure 22: The Pfannenrennen in the Triumphzug

Figure 23: The Rennzeug

257

Figure 24: The Stechzeug

Figure 25: A Rennzeug Backplate

258

Figure 26: Mechanical Breastplate for the Rennen

Figure 27: Gasper Lamberger’s Personal Emblem

259

Figure 28: Child’s Jousting Toy on a Caparison

Figure 29: The Lock and Key Caparisons in the Turnierbuch of Wilhelm IV

260

Figure 30: The Margrave Friedrich of Brandenburg and his Servant Jousting

Figure 31: Young Boy on a Lance in the Turnierbuch of Marx Walther

261

Figure 32: Fabric-Draped Shields in BSB, Cod.icon 398

Figure 33: Marx Walther Wearing a Skewer of Sausages Crest

262

Figure 34: Gasper Lamberger Wearing a Basket of Cats Crest

Figure 35: Marx Walther and his Attendants in a Tournament

263

Figure 36: A Romantic Image of the Tournament of Worms

264

Appendix 2: Glossary

Armet – A close-helmet of Italian origin featuring a visor and worn most often in the

Welschrennen.

Bard – Articulated armour covering for a knight’s horse, normally consisting of three parts:

Crupper – The section covering the horse’s rump.

Flanchard – The section covering the horse’s sides.

Peytral – The section covering the horse’s chest.

Bevor – Protection for a knight’s neck and lower face. In the Rennen, this was often

incorporated into the knight’s shield. Also known as a beaver.

Brechschild – A style of shield used in the Rennen composed of multiple elements fastened

together. It was often made to cover the entirety of a knight’s right side and incorporated the

vamplate for the lance as well. Also known as a Brechscheibe.

Caparison – Textile covering for a knight’s horse, usually made to go over the metal bard. In

the joust, either the caparison or the shaffron often had no eye-holes, obscuring the horse’s

vision and preventing them from seeing the oncoming horse. Also known as a trapper.

Coronel – A blunted tip (usually three-pronged) for a lance used in a tournament, specifically

the Gestech.

Crest – The three-dimensional decorative element worn on top of a knight’s helmet.

Crinnet – Articulated armour made to protect a horse’s neck.

Cuir bouilli – Leather hardened in either boiled water or wax and then moulded into a

specific form. The material from which crests were most often constructed.

265

Dilgen – Armour to protect a knight’s upper legs, consisting of two spherical sockets,

connected by a leather strap, resting independently on the horse’s back. Also known as tilting

sockets.

Frog-mouth helm – The style of helmet used most frequently in the Gestech, characterised

primarily by its narrow vision slit at the very top of the helmet, above eye level. This feature

would have required the knight to lean forward in his saddle during a joust in order to see his

oncoming opponent. However, by raising his head at the last moment, the design would also

have protected his eyes from splinters from the lances. Known in German as a Stechhelm.

Gestech – One of the two (along with Rennen) primary overarching styles of late medieval

German joust, characterised by its use of blunted lances and the Stechhelm.

Helmhaube – Padded hood, normally made of linen, worn inside the Stechhelm and fastened

to it by a series of ties. This protected the knight’s head inside the helm and prevented it from

impacting the walls of the helm.

Hohenzeug – The saddle used in the form of joust known as the Gestech im Hohenzeug, which

was designed to elevate the rider far off the back of the horse.

Krippen – The semi-circular, fan-like plates attached to the Rennhut and designed to spring

away. Most commonly used in the Bundrennen.

Lance – The primary weapon used in the joust, which could either be pointed or blunted and

hollow or solid, depending on the style of joust.

Lists – The designated area in which a tournament took place.

Mummerei – A masked dance commonly held at court as part of the evening celebrations

following a tournament. Themed or regional costumes were often worn.

Points – Ties used to affix a knight’s armour.

266

Queue – A metal hook sometimes found protruding from the back of tournament armour,

which was designed to catch and cradle the lance while jousting. There is a possible

etymological connection to the German term Schweif/Schweifrennen, or ‘tail’.

Rennen – One of the two (along with Gestech) primary overarching styles of late medieval

German joust, characterised by its use of pointed lances and the sallet.

Renntartsche – The large shield, usually made of wood and leather, worn in the Rennen, which

covered the entire front of a knight’s body and lower face, eliminating the need for a metal

breastplate or bevor.

Rennzeug – The complete suit of armour worn in a Rennen.

Sabatons – Armoured protection for a knight’s feet.

Sallet – The style of helmet used most frequently in the Rennen, characterised by its minimal

face protection and distinctive tapering point at the rear. Known in German as a Rennhut.

Schraubenschlüssel – A three-pronged, multi-purpose tool used for assembling both the

Rennzeug and the Stechzeug.

Shaffron – Armour protecting a horse’s head, often intended to be worn under a caparison. In

the joust, either the shaffron or the caparison often had no eye-holes, obscuring the horse’s

vision and preventing them from seeing the oncoming horse.

Stechsack – A padded bumper worn around a horse’s neck to protect its rider’s legs in lieu of

plate armour. Also known as a Stechküssen.

Stechtartsche – The small rectangular shield used in the Gestech, which was fastened to the

breastplate.

267

Stechzeug – The complete suit of armour worn in a Gestech.

Streiftartsche – Armour to protect a knight’s upper legs, similar in form and function to

dilgen but broader and shallower in depth. Used in the Rennen.

Tassets – Articulated armoured protection for a knight’s thighs.

Tilt – The wooden barrier separating two knights in a joust. ‘Tilting’ would eventually become

a synonym for the act of jousting.

Tonnlet – An armoured ‘skirt’ worn in foot combat to protect a knight’s upper legs.

Vamplate – A metal cone surrounding the shaft of the lance to provide protection to the

knight’s hand.

268

Appendix 3: Extant Maximilian Tournament Armours

This appendix is sorted under the headings of armour and associated items relating to the

broad divisions of the Gestech, the Rennen, the tourney, and foot combat, which are, when

possible, further divided into complete suits, partial suits, accessories and equestrian items.

Also included are miscellaneous individual items and miscellaneous equestrian items. Each of

these categories is organised chronologically. The appendix was compiled primarily from the

inventory of the Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer (HJRK), the collection of arms and armour (formerly

known as the Waffensammlung) in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. It also draws upon the

holdings of the Royal Armouries, UK, and the American collections of the Philadelphia

Museum of Art and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Items related to the Gestech

Complete suits

1. Complete Stechzeug

Date: c. 1485

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S VI

2. Complete Stechzeug for the Welschgestech

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Netherlands

Armourer: Unknown master ‘h’

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S II

Partial suits

3. Stechzeug fragment for the Welschgestech

Date: c. 1490-95

269

Manufactured: Netherlands and Augsburg

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S. III

4. Stechzeug fragment

Date: c. 1494

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmid

Current location: Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1930-63-1a—t

5. Three Stechzeug fragments

Date: 1494

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Jörg Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S. XI; S. XIII; S. XV

6. Two Stechzeug fragments

Date: 1494

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S. XII; S. XIV

7. Two Stechzeug fragments

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Nürnberg

Armourer: Konrad Poler

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S. XVII; S. XVIII

8. Stechzeug fragment for the Welschgestech

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Netherlands and Augsburg

Armourer: Unknown

270

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S. IV

9. Stechzeug fragment

Date: c. 1510

Manufactured: Nürnberg

Armourer: Konrad Poler

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK S. XIX

Accessories

10. Coronel lance head for the Gestech

Date: c. 1480-90

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Maker: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 53

11. Three Schraubenschlüssel for a Stechzeug

Date: Late-fifteenth century

Manufactured: Southern Germany

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 141c; B 171e; B 174e

Equestrian

12. Ten saddles for the Gestech

Date: Late 15th century

Manufactured: South Germany

Maker: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 204; B 208; B 131; B 3;

B 17; B 135; B 88; B 203; B 6; B 10

271

13. Stechsack

Date: c. 1480-90

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Maker: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 14

Items related to the Rennen

Complete suits

14. Complete Rennzeug

Date: c. 1485-90

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Jörg Treytz

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK R I

15. Complete Rennzeug

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmied

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 182

16. Complete Rennzeug

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK R VI

17. Complete Rennzeug

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: South Germany

272

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Leeds, Royal Armouries, II.167, VII.1365

18. Complete Rennzeug

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK R VII

19. Complete Rennzeug

Date: c. 1510-15

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Konrad Seusenhofer

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK R VIII

20. Complete Rennzeug

Date: c. 1515

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK R IX

Partial suits

21. Backplate for a Rennzeug

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 174

273

Helms

22. Helm for a Welschrennen

Date: 1485

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 22

23. Rennhut

Date: c. 1490-95

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmid

Current location: New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 29.156.45

24. Rennhut

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK W A 26

25. Rennhut and bevor

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 12; B 129

Accessories

26. Three Schraubenschlüssel for a Rennzeug

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Southern Germany

Armourer: Unknown

274

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 137f; B 172b; B 180c

Equestrian

27. Seven saddles for the Rennen

Date: Late 15th century

Manufactured: South Germany

Maker: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B206; B 61; B 64; B 205;

B 142; B 138; B 91

Items related to the tourney

Partial suits

28. Arms (upper and lower cannons) for a Kolbenturnier

Date: 1486

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK A 79

Helms

29. Helm for a Kolbenturnier

Date: c. 1480-85

Manufactured: South Germany

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 75

275

Items related to foot combat

Complete suits

30. Complete foot combat harness

Date: Before 1508

Manufactured: Arbois, Burgundy

Armourer: Francesco da Merate of Milan

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 71

Helms

31. Helm for foot combat

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Netherlands

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 152

32. Helm for foot combat

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Netherlands

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 23

Miscellaneous individual pieces

33. One pair dilgen

Date: c. 1485

Manufactured: Augsburg

Amourer: Lorenz Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK A 62a

276

34. Right Streiftartsche

Date: c. 1485

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 11

35. Brechschild

Date: c. 1485

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 132

36. Exposed mechanical breastplate

Date: c. 1490

Manufactured: South Germany or Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 21

37. Exposed mechanical breastplate

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmied

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 25

38. Brechschild fragment

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz or Jörg Helmschmid

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 5c

277

39. Brechschild

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 12a; B 182e

40. Brechschild

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown, in the style of Hans Prunner

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 178b

41. Brechschild

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 143; W A 26

42. One pair dilgen

Date: c. 1500

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 174c

43. Two Helmhauben

Date: c. 1480-90

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Maker: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 46; B 113

278

Miscellaneous equestrian

44. Blind shaffron

Date: c. 1480-90

Manufactured: Innsbruck

Armourer: Unknown

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK B 141a

45. Seven blind shaffrons

Date: c. 1485-90

Manufactured: Augsburg

Armourer: Lorenz Helmschmied

Current location: Vienna, Kunshistorisches Museum, HJRK B 4; B 139; B 182d; B 87b;

B 19a; B 173b; B 137c

46. Seven spurs

Date: c. 1495

Manufactured: Southern Germany

Maker: Unknown master ‘s’

Current location: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, HJRK A 149 (2); A 151; A 152;

A 130; A 157 (2)

279

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Print sources

Böhmer, J. F., Regesta Imperii XIV: Ausgewählte Regesten des Kaiserreiches unter Maximilian I. 1493-

1519, 4 vols (Cologne: Böhlau, 1990-2004)

The Book of Hours of the Emperor Maximilian the First, ed. by Walter L. Strauss (New York:

Abaris Books Inc., 1974)

Der Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis, ed. by Hans Rupprich (Munich: C.H. Beck’sche

Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934)

Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts Relating to English Affairs Existing in the Archives and

Collections of Venice and in Other Libraries of Northern Italy, ed. by Rawdon Brown

(London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, and Green, 1864)

de Charny, Geoffroi, The Book of Chivalry of Geoffroi de Charny: Text, Context, and Translation, ed.

by Richard Kaeuper and Elspeth Kennedy (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania

Press, 1996)

Die Chroniken der deutschen Städte: vom 14. bis ins 16. Jahrhundert, 31 vols (Leipzig: Verlag von

G. Hirzel/Göttingen: Vandehoeck & Ruprecht, 1862-1968)

Collected Works of Erasmus, 86 vols, trans. by R.A.B. Mynors and D.F.S. Thomson (Toronto:

University of Toronto Press, 1974-1993), vol. 4, The Correspondence of Erasmus: Letters

446 to 593, 1516 to 1517 (1977)

Collection des voyages des souverains des Pays-Bas, ed. by Louis Prosper Gachard (Brussels: F.

Hayez, 1876)

280

de Commynes, Philippe, Memoirs, ed. by Samuel Kinser, trans. by Isabelle Cazeaux, 2 vols

(Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1973)

Coronatio Maximiliani (Mainz: Peter Schoeffer, 15th century) Vienna, Österreichische

Nationalbibliothek, Ink. 2.H.111

Coronatio Maximiliani I., archiducis Austriae, in regem Romanorum (Hanover: 1613), Vienna,

Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Ink. 28.V.30

Correspondance de l’empereur Maximilian Ier et de Marguerite d’Autriche, ed. by André Joseph and

Ghislain le Glay, 2 vols (Paris: Société de l’Histoire de France, 1839)

Cuspinianus, Johannes, De Caesaribus atque imperatoribus Romanis (Basil: 1561), Munich,

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, 2 Germ.g. 14 t

—— ‘Tagebuch Johannes Cuspinian’s: 1502-1527’, ed. by Th. G. von Karajan, in Fontes Rerum

Austriacarum 1/1 (1855), 397-416

Deutsche Reichstagakten unter Maximilian I., vols 1-6 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,

1972- )

von Eschenbach, Wolfram, Parzival, ed. by Joachim Bumke (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer

Verlag, 2008)

von Eyb, Ludwig, Die Geschichten und Taten Wilwolts von Schaumburg, ed. by Adelbert von Keller

(Stuttgart: Literarischen Vereins, 1859)

le Févre, Jean, Chronique, ed. by Francois Morand, 2 vols (Paris: Société de l’Histoire de

France, 1876-81)

281

Freydal: des Kaisers Maximilian I turniere und mummereien, ed. by Quirin von Leitner (Vienna:

Adolf Hozhausen, 1880-1882)

Die Geferlicheiten und geschichten des löblichen streytbaren unnd hochberiempten Helds und Ritters

Teürdancks (Augsburg: Stainer, 1537), Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Rar. 2195

Georg Spalatin's historischer Nachlaß und Briefe, ed. by Christian Gotthold Neudecker (Jena:

Mauke, 1851)

Grünpeck, Joseph, Die Geschichte Friedrichs III und Maximilians I, trans. by Theodor Ilgen

(Leipzig: Verlag der Deutschen Buchhandlung, 1899)

—— Die Historia Friderici et Maximiliani, ed. by Otto Bensch and Edwin M. Auer (Berlin:

Deutscher Verein für Kunstwissenschaft, 1957)

Hans Burgkmair des Jüngeren: Turnierbuch von 1529, ed. by Heinrich Pallmann (Leipzig: Karl W.

Hiersemann, 1910)

Hans Burgkmaiers Turnier-Buch, ed. by Jakob Heinrich von Hefner (Frankfurt am Main: Sigmund

Schmerber, 1853)

Jedin, Hubert, ‘Ein Prinzenspiegel für den jungen Maximilian I.’, in Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 43

(1961), 52-61

Krönung Erzherzog Maximilians zu einem römischen König (Augsburg: Anton Sorg, 15th century),

Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Ink. 18.C.19

Ein Lehrbuch für Maximilian I. (Codex Ser.n. 2617, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek,

Vienna) (Salzburg: Andreas & Andreas, 1981)

Die Lehrbücher Maximilians I. und die Anfänge der Frakturschrift, ed. by Heinrich Fichtenau

(Hamburg: Maximilian Gesellschaft, 1961)

282

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, ed. by J.S. Brewer, vols 1-2 (London: 1864-

1920)

von Liechtenstein, Ulrich, Frauendienst, ed. by Franz Viktor Spechtler (Göppingen:

Kümmerle Verlag, 2003)

Lysons, Samuel, ‘XXXVI. Copy of a Roll of Purchases made for the Tournament of Windsor

Park, in the sixth year of King Edward the first, preserved in the Record Office at the

Tower’, Archaeologia, 17 (1814), 297-310

Machiavelli, Niccolò, The Prince, trans. and ed. by Peter Bondanella (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2005)

de la Marche, Olivier, Mémoires, ed. by Henri Beaune and J. D’Arbaumont, 4 vols (Paris:

Librairie Renouard, 1883-88)

Molinet, Jean, Chroniques, ed. by Georges Doutrepont and Omer Jodogne, 3 vols (Brussels:

Palais des Académies, 1935-37)

Monumenta Habsburgica: Sammlung von Actenstücken und Briefen zur Geschichte des Hauses Habsburg im

Zeitalter Maximilians I., ed. by Joseph Chmel, 3 vols (Vienna: Kaiserlich-königlichen

Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1854-58)

Monumenta Wormatiensia: Annalen und Chroniken, ed. by Heinrich Boos (Berlin: Weidmann,

1893)

Quellen zur Geschichte Maximilians I. und seiner Zeit, ed. by Inge Wiesflecker-Friedhuber

(Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1996)

283

Rüxner, Georg, TurnierBuch Von Anfang, ursprung, und herkommen, der Thurnier im heyligen

Römischen Reich Teutscher Nation… (Frankfurt am Main: Feyerabend & Hüter, 1566),

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, 4 Mil.g 223 p#Beibd.2

Der Sächsischen Kurfürsten Turnierbücher, ed. by Erich Haenel (Frankfurt: Verlag von Heinrich

Keller, 1910)

Sanuto, Marino, I Diarii di Marino Sanuto, 58 vols (Venice: 1879-1903)

Schneider, Eugen, ‘Johan Reuchlins Berichte über die Krönung Maximilians I. in Jahre

1486’, Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins, 52 (1898), 547-559

Theuerdank: The Adventures and a Portion of the Story of the Praiseworthy, Valiant, and High-Renowned

Hero and Knight, Lord Tewrdannckh, ed. by W. Harry Rylands (London: Holbein Society,

1884)

The Tournament Book of Gašper Lamberger / Das Turnierbuch des Caspar von Lamberg, Codex A 2290,

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Wien, Hofjagd- und Rüstkammer, ed. by Dušan Kos

(Ljubljana: Viharnik, d.o.o., 1997)

The Triumph of Maximilian: 137 Woodcuts by Hans Burgkmair and Others, ed. and trans. by

Stanley Applebaum (New York: Dover Publications, 1964)

Turnierbuch Herzogs Wilhelm des Vierten von Bayern, von 1510 bis 1545, ed. by F. Schlichtegroll

(Munich: 1817)

Turnierzug Hans Burgkmair des Älteren, ed. by Hans Stöcklein (Munich: Verlag für Historische

Waffenskunde, 1924)

‘Urkunden, Acten und Regesten aus dem Archiv des K. K. Ministeriums des Innern’, ed. by

Heinrich Zimerman, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten

Kaiserhauses, vol. 5, 2 (1887), 1-78

284

Urkunden, Briefe und Actenstücke zur Geschichte Maximilians I. und Seiner Zeit, ed. by Joseph

Chmel (Stuttgart: Literarischen Verein, 1845)

Urkunden zur Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bundes (1488-1533), 2 vols, ed. by Karl A. Klüpfel

(Stuttgart: Literarischen Verein, 1846-53)

‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus- Hof- und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, ed. by

Heinrich Zimerman, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten

Kaiserhauses, vol. 1, 2 (1883), 1-78

‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus- Hof- und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, ed. by

Heinrich Zimerman, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten

Kaiserhauses, vol. 3, 2 (1885), 82-152

‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Reichs-Finanz-Archiv’ ed. by Heinrich

Zimerman, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses,

vol. 3, 2 (1885), 1-81

Vives, Juan Luis, The Education of a Christian Woman (London: 1529), Early English Books

Online: from a copy in the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, DC

Weckherlin, Georg Rodolf, Triumphall shevvs set forth lately at Stutgart. Written first in German,

and now in English by G. Rodolfe Weckherlin, secretarie to the Duke of Wirtemberg (Stuttgart:

John-Wyrich Resslin, 1616), Early English Books Online: from a copy in the British

Library, London

Der Weißkunig: Eine Erzehlung von den Thaten Kaiser Maximilian des Ersten (Vienna: Kurzböck,

1775)

285

Der Weisskunig: Nach den Dictaten und Eigenhandigen Aufzeichnungen Kaiser Maximilian I, ed. by

Alwin Schultz, reprinted from Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhochsten

Kaiserhauses 6 (1891)

Weiss Kunig: tableau des principaux evenemens de la vie et du regne de l’empereur Maximilian I (Vienna:

Chez I. Alberti, 1799)

‘Zweytes Gedenkbuch des Kaisers Maximilian I., aus den Handschriften der k.k.

Ambraser=Sammlung zu Wien’, Taschenbuch für die vaterländische Geschichte, 5 (1824), 39-

81

Manuscripts

Paris, Bibliothèque National, Ms. Arsenal 479, Le Grand Armorial de la Toison d’Or

Prague, Umĕleckoprůmyslové Museum v Praze, inv. GK 11.572-B, The Thun Sketchbooks

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 961, Das Turnierbuch des Ludwig von Eyb

Munich, Bayerishe Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 1930, Marx Walther, Turnierbuch und

Familienchronik

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod.icon. 222, Zeugbuch Kaiser Maximilians I.

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod.icon. 393(2, De arte athletica II

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod.icon. 398, Turnierbuch. Ritterspiele gehalten von Kaiser

Friedrich III. und Kaiser Maximilian I. in den Jahren 1489 – 1511

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod.icon. 403, Turnierbuch - Kopie nach dem Original von

Hans Burgkmair

286

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 22.229, Album of Tournaments and Parades in Nuremberg

287

Secondary Sources

Alexander, Piccolruaz, ‘Turniere und Turniergesellschaften des Spätmittelalters’ (unpublished

master’s thesis, Leopold-Franzens-Universität, Innsbruck, 1993)

Anglo, Sydney, ‘How to Win at Tournaments: The Technique of Chivalric Combat’,

Antiquaries 68 (1988), 248-64

—— ‘Humanism and the Court Arts’, in The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe, ed. by

Anthony Goodman and Angus MacKay (London: Longman, 1990), pp. 66-98

—— The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000)

Ascherl, Rosemary, ‘The Technology of Chivalry in Reality and Romance’, in The Study of

Chivalry: Resources and Approaches, ed. by Howell Chickering and Thomas H. Seiler

(Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1988), pp. 263-311

Auge, Oliver, ‘»So solt e rim namen gottes mit mir hinfahren, ich were doch verderbt zu

einem kriegsmann« - Durch Kampf und Turnier körperlich versehrte Adelige im

Spannungsfeld von Ehrpostulat und Eigener Leistungsfähigkeit’ Medizin,

Gesellschaft und Geschichte 28 (2009), 21-46

Baldass, Ludwig, Der Künstlerkreis Kaiser Maximilians (Vienna: Kunstverlag Anton Schroll &

Co., 1923)

Barber, Richard, The Knight and Chivalry, Revised Edition (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1995)

Barber, Richard and Juliet Barker, Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry and Pageants in the Middle Ages

(Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989)

Barker, Juliet, The Tournament in England: 1100-1400 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1986)

288

Bax, E. Belfort, German Society at the Close of the Middle Ages (London: Swan Sonnenschein &

Co., 1894)

Benecke, Gerhard, Society and Politics in Germany 1500-1750 (London: Routledge & Kegan

Paul, 1974)

—— Maximilian I (1459-1519): An Analytical Biography (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,

1982)

Blair, Claude, European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700 (London: B.T. Batsford, 1958)

Boehim, Wendelin, Handbuch der Waffenkunde: Das Waffenwesen in seiner historischen Entwicklung

vom Beginn des Mittelalters bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig: Verlag von E. A.

Seemann, 1890)

Boulton, D’Arcy Jonathan Dacre, The Knights of the Crown: The Monarchical Orders of Knighthood in

Later Medieval Europe, 1325-1520 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1987)

—— ‘The Order of the Golden Fleece and the Creation of Burgundian National Identity’, in

The Ideology of Burgundy: The Promotion of National Consciousness, 1364-1565, ed. by D’Arcy

Jonathan Dacre Boulton and Jan R. Veenstra (Leiden: Brill, 2006), pp. 21-97

Bousmar, Eric, ‘Jousting at the Court of Burgundy. The “Pas d’armes”: Shifts in Scenario,

Location and Recruitment’, in Staging the Court of Burgundy: Proceedings of the Conference

‘The Splendour of Burgundy’, ed. by Wim Blockmans and others (London: Harvey

Miller Publishers, 2013), pp. 75-84

Brandstätter, Klaus, ‘Aspekte der Festkultur unter Maximilian’, in Maximilian I. (1459-1519):

Wahrnehmung – Übersetzungen – Gender, ed. by Heinz Noflascher, Michael A. Chisholm,

and Bertrand Schnerb, Innsbrucker Historische Studien, 27 (Innsbruck: Studienverlag,

2011), pp. 156-70

289

Breiding, Dirk H., ‘Arms and Amour: a Farewell to Persistent Myths and Misconceptions’, in

Perspectives on Medieval Art: Learning through Looking, ed. by Ena Giurescu Heller and

Patricia C. Pongracz (New York: Museum of Biblical Art, 2010), pp. 167-86

—— ‘Harnisch und Waffen des Hoch und Spätmittelalters’, in AufRuhr 1225! Ritter, Burgen

und Intrigen – Das Mittelalter an Rhein und Ruhr, ed. by Brunhilde Leenen (Mainz: Philipp

von Zabern, 2010), pp. 129-46

—— ‘Rennen, Stechen und Turnier zur Zeit Kaiser Maximilians I.’, in ‘“Vor Halbtausend

Jahren…” – Festschrift zur Erinnerung an den Besuch des Kaisers Maximilian I. in St. Wendel’,

ed. by Cornelieke Lagerwaard (St. Wendel: Stadtmuseum, 2012), pp. 53-84

—— ‘Some Notes on Great Helms, Crests and Early Tournament Reinforces’, The Park

Lane Arms Fair (2013), 18-35

Bumke, Joachim, Courtly Culture: Literature and Society in the High Middle Ages, trans. by Thomas

Dunlap (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991)

Cartellieri, Otto, The Court of Burgundy, trans. by Malcolm Letts (London: Kegan Paul, Trench,

Trubner & Co., Ltd, 1929)

Chisholm, Michael A. ‘Robert Wingfield: English Ambassador to the Holy Roman Empire

(1510-1517)’, in Maximilian I. (1459-1519): Wahrnehmung – Übersetzungen – Gender, ed. by

Heinz Noflascher, Michael A. Chisholm, and Bertrand Schnerb, Innsbrucker

Historische Studien, 27 (Innsbruck: Studienverlag, 2011), pp. 71-83

Clephan, Coltman R., The Tournament: Its Periods and Phases (London: Metheun & Co. Ltd,

1919)

Crouch, David, Tournament (London: Hambledon and London, 2005)

290

Cuneo, Pia F., ‘(Un)Stable Identities: Hippology and the Professionalization of Scholarship

and Horsemanship in Early Modern Germany’, in Early Modern Zoology: The

Construction of Animals in Science, Literature and the Visual Arts, ed. by Karl A.E. Enenkel

and Paul J. Smith (Leiden: Brill, 2007)

Cuyler, Louise, The Emperor Maximilian I and Music (London: Oxford University Press, 1973)

Damen, Mario, ‘Tournament Culture in the Low Countries and England’, in Contact in

Exchange in Later Medieval Europe. Essays in Honour of Malcolm Vale, ed. by Hannah

Skoda and others (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2012), pp. 247-66

—— ‘The Town, the Duke, his Courtiers, and their Tournament. A Spectacle in Brussels, 4-7

May 1439’, in Staging the Court of Burgundy: Proceedings of the Conference ‘The Splendour of

Burgundy’, ed. by Wim Blockmans and others (London: Harvey Miller Publishers, 2013),

pp. 85-95

—— ‘The Town as a Stage? Urban Space and Tournaments in Late Medieval Brussells’,

Urban History (February 2015), 1-25

Dünnebeil, Sonja, ‘Innen und Außen. Die Feste des Ordens vom Goldenen Vlies unter den

Herzögen von Burgund’, in Virtuelle Räume: Raumwahrnehmung und Raumvorstellung im

Mittelalter, ed. by Elisabeth Vavra (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2005), pp. 239-57

—— ‘Schatz, Repräsentation und Propaganda am Beispiel Burgunds’, in Vom Umgang mit

Schätzen, Internationaler Kongress, Krems an der Donau, 28-30 October 2004 (Vienna:

Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2007), pp. 327-344

—— ‘The Order of the Golden Fleece in the Year 1478 – Continuity or

Recommencement?’, in Staging the Court of Burgundy: Proceedings of the Conference ‘The

Splendour of Burgundy’, ed. by Wim Blockmans and others (London: Harvey Miller

Publishers, 2013), pp. 59-65

291

Dupras, Nickolas, ‘Armourers and their Workshops: The Tools and Techniques of Late

Medieval Armour Production’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Leeds,

2012)

van Dyke, Paul, ‘The Literary Activity of the Emperor Maximilian I’, American Historical

Review, 11 (1905), 16-28

Early Modern German Literature: 1350-1700, ed. by Max Reinhart (Rochester, NY: Camden

House, 2007)

Eichberger, Dagmar, ‘Car il me semble que vous aimez bien les carboncles. Die Schätze Margaretes

von Österreich und Maximilians I.’, in Vom Umgang mit Schätzen, Internationaler

Kongress, Krems an der Donau, 28-30 October 2004 (Vienna: Verlag der

Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2007), pp. 139-52

—— ‘Official Portraits and Regional Identities: The Case of Emperor Maximilian I (1459-

1519)’, in The Habsburgs and their Courts in Europe, 1400-1700: Between Cosmopolitan and

Regionalism, ed. by Herbert Karner, Ingrid Ciulisová, and Bernardo J. García García

(Palatium e-Publicaion: www.courtresidences.eu, 2014), pp. 100-114

Fallows, Noel, Jousting in Medieval and Renaissance Iberia (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2010)

Fichtenau, Heinrich, Der Junge Maximilian (1459-1482) (Vienna: Verlag für Geschichte und

Politik, 1959)

Fichtner, Paula S., ‘The Politics of Honor: Renaissance Chivalry and Habsburg Dynasticism’,

Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance, 29 (1967), 567-80

—— ‘Maximilian I and His ‘Others’: A Dialogue of the Fantastic and the Real’, in Maximilian

I. (1459-1519): Wahrnehmung – Übersetzungen – Gender, ed. by Heinz Noflascher, Michael

292

A. Chisholm, and Bertrand Schnerb, Innsbrucker Historische Studien, 27 (Innsbruck:

Studienverlag, 2011), pp. 31-44

—— The Habsburgs: Dynasty, Culture and Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014)

Fink, Monika, ‘Turnier- und Tanzveranstaltungen am Hofe Kaiser Maximilians I.’, in Musik

und Tanz zur Zeit Kaiser Maximilian I, ed. by Walter Salmen (Innsbruck: Edition

Helbling, 1992), pp. 37-48

Frenzel, H.A. and E., Daten deutscher Dichtung: Chronologischer Abriß der deutschen Literaturgeschichte,

vol. 1, Von den Anfängen bis zum Jungen Deutschland (Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch

Verlag, 1962)

Frieder, Braden, Chivalry and the Perfect Prince: Tournaments, Art, and Armor at the Spanish

Habsburg Court (Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2008)

Fleckenstein, Josef, ‘Das Turnier als höfisches Fest im hochmittelalterlichen Deutschland’ in

Das ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter, ed. by Josef Fleckenstein (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &

Ruprecht, 1986), pp. 229-56

Gamber, Ortwin, ‘Der Turnierharnisch zur Zeit König Maximilians I. und das Thunsche

Skizzenbuch’, Jahrbuch des kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, 53 (1957), 33-70

—— ‘Ritterspiele und Turnierrüstung im Spätmittelalter’, in Das ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter,

ed. by Josef Fleckenstein (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), pp. 513-31.

Geisberg, Max, The German Single-leaf Woodcut: 1500-1550, rev. and ed. by Walter L. Strauss

(New York: Hacker Art Books, 1974)

Gillingham, John, ‘Elective Kingship and the Unity of Medieval Germany’ German History 9

(1991), 124-135

293

Gillmor, Caroll, ‘Practical Chivalry: The Training of Horses for Tournaments and Warfare’,

Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, 13 (1992), 5-29

Gottlieb, Theodor, Büchersammlung Kaiser Maximilians I (Amsterdam: Gérard Th. Van Heusden,

1968)

Gosman, Martin, ‘Princely Culture: Friendship or Patronage?’, in Princes and Princely Culture:

1450-1650, ed. by Martin Gosman and others (Leiden: Brill, 2003), vol. I, pp. 1-29

Green, Helen, ‘Meetings of City and Court: Music and Ceremony in the Imperial Cities of

Maximilian I’, in Kaiser Maximilian I. (1459-1519) und die Hofkultur seiner Zeit, ed. by

Sieglinde Hartmann and others (Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2009), Jahrbuch der

Oswald von Wolkenstein-Gesellschaft 17 for 2008-2009, pp. 261-274

Größing, Sigrid-Maria, Maximilian I.: Kaiser, Künstler, Kämpfer (Vienna: Amalthea Signum

Verlag, 2002)

Häberlein, Bianca, ‘Die Konzeption des Abenteuers im 'Wilhelm von Österreich' Johanns von

Würzburg und im Theuerdank Maximilians I.’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und

Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I., ed. by Jan-Dirk Müller and Hans-Joachim

Ziegeler (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015), pp. 281-94

Hale, J.R., War and Society in Renaissance Europe (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1985)

—— Artists and Warfare in the Renaissance (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990)

Hayton, Darin, The Crown and the Cosmos: Astrology and the Politics of Maximilian I (Pittsburgh:

University of Pittsburgh Press, 2015)

Hayward, Maria, ‘Transporting Royal Treasures: A Case study from the Court of Henry VIII’,

in Vom Umgang mit Schätzen, Internationaler Kongress, Krems an der Donau, 28-30

October 2004 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,

2007), pp. 307-326

294

Heil, Dietmar, ‘“Anfengklich sollet ir inen sagen unser gnad und alles gut”: Die

Reichstagsinstruktionen und Reichstagsordungen Kaiser Maximilians I. (1486/93-

1519)’, in Ordnung durch Tinte und Feder?: Genese und Wirkung von Instruktionen im

zeitlichen Längschnitt vom Mittelalter bis zum 20. Jahrhundert, ed. by Anita Hipfinger and

others (Vienna: Böhlau Verlag, 2011), pp. 49-71

Heinig, Paul-Joachim, ‘Reich und Adel in der Epoche Kaiser Friedrichs III.’, in König, Fürsten

und Reich im 15. Jahrhundert, ed. by Franz Fuchs, Paul-Joachim Heinig, and Jörg Schwarz

(Cologne: Böhlau, 2009) pp. 193-211

Hollegger, Manfred, Maximilian I. (1459-1519): Herrscher und Mensch einer Zeitenwende

(Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer GmbH, 2005)

—— ‘Lebenszeugnisse und Archivalien zur Rekonstruktion des Hoflebens Kaiser

Maximilians I’, in Kaiser Maximilian I. (1459-1519) und die Hofkultur seiner Zeit, ed. by

Sieglinde Hartmann and others (Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2009), Jahrbuch der

Oswald von Wolkenstein-Gesellschaft 17 for 2008-2009, pp. 411-23

Huizinga, Johann, The Waning of the Middle Ages (London: Edward Arnold & Co., 1924)

Die Inschriften des Bundeslandes Tirol, Teil 1, ed. by Werner Köfler and Romedio Schmitz-Esser

(Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2003), Die Deutschen

Inschriften 82

Jackson, William H., ‘The Tournament and Chivalry in German Tournament Books of the

Sixteenth Century and in the Literary Works of Emperor Maximilian I’, in Ideals and

Practices of Medieval Knighthood: Papers from the First and Second Strawberry Hill Conferences,

ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Ruth Harvey (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1986), pp.

49-73

295

—— ‘Das Turnier in der deutschen Dichtung des Mittelalters’, in Das ritterliche Turnier im

Mittelalter, ed. by Josef Fleckenstein (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), pp.

257-95

—— ‘Tournaments and the German Chivalric renovatio: Tournament Discipline and the

Myth of Origins’, in Chivalry in the Renaissance, ed. by Sydney Anglo (Woodbridge:

Boydell, 1990), pp. 77-91

Jones, Robert, Bloodied Banners: Martial Display on the Medieval Battlefield (Woodbridge: Boydell,

2010)

—— Knight: The Warrior and World of Chivalry (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2011)

Karaskova, Olga, ‘“Unq dessoir de cinq degrez”: Mary of Burgundy and the Construction

of the Image of the Female Ruler’, in Authority and Gender in Medieval and Renaissance

Chronicles, ed. by Juliana Dresvina and Nicholas Sparks (Cambridge: Cambridge

Scholars, 2012), pp. 319-44.

Kaeuper, Richard W., Chivalry and Violence in Medieval Society (Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 1999)

Keen, Maurice, Chivalry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984)

Kekewich, Margaret L. and Susan Rose, Britain, France & the Empire: 1350-1500 (New York:

Palgrave Macmillan, 2005)

Kernodle, George R. and Portia, ‘Dramatic Aspects of the Medieval Tournament’, Speech

Monographs 9 (1942), 161-72

Kohnen, Rabea, ‘"Das mer gebeert zuo eim Ritter auserkorn". Überlegungen zum

Theuerdank’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser

296

Maximilians I., ed. by Jan-Dirk Müller and Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (Berlin: De Gruyter,

2015), pp. 255-80

Koller, Erwin, ‘Jagdszenen aus Tirol: Maximilian I. auf Pirsch im Schmirn und anderswo’, in

Literatur und Sprachkultur in Tirol, ed. by Johann Jolzner, Oskar Putzer, and Max Siller

(Innsbruck: Inst. für Germanistik, 1997), pp. 265-72

Kramer, Dieter, German Holidays and Folk Customs (Hamburg: Atlantik-Brücke, 1972)

Kraus, Victor von, Itinerarium Maximiliani I.: 1508 – 1518 (Vienna: 1899)

Krause, Stefan, ‘“They call it royal for good reason”: The Tournaments of the Late Middle

Ages and the Renaissance’, in Habsburg Splendour: Masterpieces from Vienna’s Imperial

Collections at the Kunshistorisches Museum, ed. by Monica Kurzel-Runtscheiner (New

Haven: Yale University Press, 2015)

Krenn, Peter, ‘Kaiser Maximilian I und das Turnierwesen seiner Zeit’ Mitteilungen des Steirischen

Burgenvereines, 13 (1971), 5-18

McDonald, William, German medieval literary patronage from Charlemagne to Maximilian I: A

critical commentary with special emphasis on imperial promotion of literature (Amsterdam:

Rodopi, 1973)

McLean, Will, ‘Outrance and Plaisance’, Journal of Medieval Military History 8 (2010), 155-

70.

The Medieval Horse and its Equipment: c. 1150–c. 1450, ed. by John Clark (Woodbridge: Boydell,

2004)

Meyer, Werner, ‘Turniergesellschaften. Bemerkungen zur sozialgeschichtlichen Bedeutung der

Turniere im Spätmittelalter’, in Das ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter, ed. by Josef

Fleckenstein (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986, pp. 500-12.

297

Michel, Eva, ‘"zu ainer gedochtnüß hie auf Erden". Albrecht Altdorfers Triumphzug für

Kaiser Maximilian’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis

Kaiser Maximilians I., ed. by Jan-Dirk Müller and Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (Berlin: De

Gruyter, 2015), pp. 381-94

Miller, Alistair, ‘Olivier de la Marche and the Court of Burgundy, c.1425-1502’ (unpublished

doctoral thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1996)

Mortimer, Richard, ‘Knights and Knighthood in Germany in the Central Middle Ages’, in

Ideals and Practices of Medieval Knighthood: Papers from the first and second Strawberry Hill

conferences, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Ruth Harvey (Woodbridge: Boydell,

1986), pp. 86-103

Müller, Jan-Dirk, ‘Funktionswandel ritterlicher Epik am Ausgang des Mittelalter’, in

Gesellschaftliche Sinnangebote mittelalterlicher Literature, ed. by Gert Kaiser (Munich: Wilhelm

Fink, 1980), pp. 11-35

—— Gedechtnus: Literatur und Hofgesellschaft um Maximilian I. (Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag,

1982)

—— ‘The Court of Emperor Maximilian I’, in Princes and Princely Culture: 1450-1650, ed. by

Martin Gosman and others (Leiden: Brill, 2003), vol. I, pp. 295-311

Muther, Richard, German Book Illustration of the Gothic Period and the Early Renaissance (1460-

1530), trans. by Ralph R. Shaw (Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press, 1972)

Müsegades, Benjamin, Fürstliche Erziehung und Ausbildung im spätmittelalterlichen Reich

(Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2014)

Nadot, Sébastien, Le Spectacle des joutes: Sport et courtoisie à la fin du Moyen Âge (Rennes: Presses

Universitaires de Rennes, 2013)

298

Nickel, Helmut, ‘The Tournament: An Historical Sketch’, in The Study of Chivalry: Resources

and Approaches, ed. by Howell Chickering and Thomas H. Seiler (Kalamazoo: Medieval

Institute Publications, 1988), pp. 213-62

—— with Dirk H. Breiding, ‘A Book of Tournaments and Parades from Nuremberg’,

Metropolitan Museum Journal, 45 (2010), 125-86

Normore, Christina, ‘On the archival rhetoric of inventories: Some records of the Valois

Burgundian court’, Journal of the History of Collections, 23 (2011), 215-27

Paravicini, Werner, ‘Gruppe und Person: Repräsentation durch Wappen im späteren

Mittelalter’, in Die Repräsentation der Gruppen: Texte, Bilder, Objekte, ed. by Otto Gerhard

Oexle and Andrea von Hülsen-Esch (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998), pp.

327-90

—— Die Ritterlich-Höfische Kultur des Mittelalters (Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1999)

Pfaffenbichler, Matthias, ‘Das Turnier als Instrument der Habsburgischen Politik’, Waffen

und Kostümkunde, Zeitschrift für Waffen- und Kleidungsgeschichte 34/1-2 (1992), 13-36

Polk, Keith, ‘Patronage, Imperial Image, and the Emperor’s Musical Retinue: On the Road

with Maximilian I.’, in Musik und Tanz zur Zeit Kaiser Maximilian I, ed. by Walter

Salmen (Innsbruck: Edition Helbling, 1992), pp. 79-88

Ranft, Andreas, Adelgesellschaften: Gruppenbildung und Genossenschaft im spätmittelalterlichen Reich

(Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 1994)

Reibisch, Friedrich Martin, Der Rittersaal: Eine Geschichte der Ritterthums, seines Entstehens und

Fortgangs, seiner Gebräuche und Sitten (Stuttgart: Verlag von Carl Hoffman, 1842)

Riegel, Nicole, ‘Bausteine eines Residenzprojekts. Kaiser Maximilian I. in Innsbruck’, in The

299

Habsburgs and their Courts in Europe, 1400-1700: Between Cosmopolitan and Regionalism,

ed. by Herbert Karner, Ingrid Ciulisová, and Bernardo J. García García (Palatium e-

Publicaion: www.courtresidences.eu, 2014), pp. 28-45

Rühl, Joachim K., ‘German Tournament Regulations of the 15th Century’, Journal of Sport

History 17 (1990), 163-82

Seton-Watson, R. W., Maximilian I, Holy Roman Emperor (London: Archibald Constable &

Co. Ltd, 1902)

Silver, Larry, ‘Shining Armor: Maximilian I as Holy Roman Emperor’, Art Institute of Chicago

Museum Studies, 12 (1985), 8-29

‘Shining Armor: Emperor Maximilian, Chivalry, and War’, in Artful Armies, Beautiful Battles: Art

and Warfare in Early Modern Europe, ed. by Pia Cuneo (Leiden: Brill, 2001), pp. 61-85

—— Marketing Maximilian: The Visual Ideology of a Holy Roman Emperor (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 2008)

Small, Graeme, ‘Of Burgundian Dukes, Counts, Saints and Kings (14 C.E. – c. 1500)’, in

The Ideology of Burgundy: The Promotion of National Consciousness, 1364-1565, ed. by

D’Arcy Jonathan Dacre Boulton and Jan R. Veenstra (Leiden: Brill, 2006), pp. 151-

94

Springer, Carolyn, Armour and Masculinity in the Italian Renaissance (Toronto: University of

Toronto Press, 2010)

Strobl, Joseph, Studien über die literarische Tätigkeit Kaiser Maximilian I. (Berlin: Georg Reimer,

1913)

300

Tennant, Elaine C., ‘Productive Reception: Theuerdank in the Sixteenth Century’, in

Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser Maximilians I., ed. by

Jan-Dirk Müller and Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015), pp. 295-348

Terjanian, Pierre, ‘The Art of the Armorer in Late Medieval and Renaissance Augsburg:

The Rediscovery of the Thun Sketchbooks’, Jahrbuch des Kunsthistorischen Museums

Wien 13/14 (2011/2012), pp. 299-321

Das Turnier zu Worms in plastischer Aufstellung mit Figuren, Versetzstücken und Oertlichkeiten in

kleinen und grossen Cartons (Vienna: M. Trentsensky, c. 1824)

Ulmann, Heinrich, Kaiser Maximilian I: Auf urkundlicher grundlage dargestellt, 2 vols (Stuttgart:

J.G. Cotta, 1884-1891)

Unterkircher, Franz, Maximilian I.: Ein kaiserlicher Auftraggeber illustrierter Handschriften

(Hamburg: Maximlian-Gesellschaft, 1983)

Vale, Juliet, ‘Violence and the Tournament’, in Violence in Medieval Society, ed. by Richard

Kaueper (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2000), pp. 143-57

Vale, Malcolm, War and Chivalry: Warfare and Aristocratic Culture in England, France and Burgundy at

the End of the Middle Ages (London: Duckworth, 1981)

Vanderjagt, Arjo, ‘The Princely Culture of the Valois Dukes of Burgundy’, in Princes and

Princely Culture: 1450-1650, ed. by Martin Gosman and others (Leiden: Brill, 2003),

vol. I, pp. 51-79

Vaughan, Richard, Valois Burgundy (London: Allen Lane, 1975)

Vehse, Carl Eduard, Memoirs of the Court, Aristocracy, and Diplomacy of Austria, trans. by Franz

Demmler (London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1856), vol. I

301

Viallon, Marina, ‘A German High Tournament Saddle in the Royal Armouries, Leeds’

Arms and Armour 12 (2015), 103-23

Waas, Glenn Elwood, The Legendary Character of Kaiser Maximilian (New York: Columbia

University Press, 1941)

Watts, Karen, ‘Taken for a Ride? The Case for a Unique Surviving Leather Horse Bard of

Henry VIII’, unpublished conference proceedings: ‘Leather in Warfare’, (Royal

Armouries, Leeds, November 2014), pp. 74-88

Watanabe-O’Kelly, Helen, Triumphall Shews: Tournaments at German-speaking Courts in their

European Context 1560-1730 (Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1992)

Wegg, Jervis, Richard Pace: A Tudor Diplomatist (London: Methuen & Co. Ltd, 1932)

Weiss, Sabine, Die Vergessene Kaiserin: Bianca Maria Sforza, Kaiser Maximilians Zweite Gemahlin

(Innsbruck: Tyrolia Verlag 2010).

Werner, Elke Anna, ‘Kaiser Maximilians Weißkunig. Einige Beobachtungen zur Werkgenese

der Illustrationen’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser

Maximilians I., ed. by Jan-Dirk Müller and Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (Berlin: De Gruyter,

2015), pp. 349-80

Whaley, Joachim, ed., Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. Volume 1: From Maximilian I to the

Peace of Westphalia, 1493-1648 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012)

Wies, Ernst W., Kaiser Maximilian I.: Ein Charakterbild (Munich: Bechtle Verlag, 2003)

Wiesflecker, Hermann, Kaiser Maximilian I.: das Reich, Österreich und Europa an der Wende zur

Neuzeit, 5 vols (Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1971-1986)

302

—— Maximilian I.: Die Fundamente des habsburgischen Weltreiches (Vienna: Verlag für

Geschichte und Politik, 1991)

Wiesflecker-Friedhuber, Inge, ‘Kaiser Maximilian I. und die Stadt Innsbruck’, in Der

Innsbrucker Hof: Residenz und höfische Gesellschaft in Tirol vom 15. bis 19. Jahrhundert, ed.

by Heinz Noflatscher and Jan Paul Niederkorn (Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie

der Wissenschaften, 2005), pp. 125-58

Williams, Alan, The Knight and the Blast Furnace: A History of the Metallurgy of Armour in the

Middle Ages & the Early Modern Period (Boston: Brill, 2003)

Williams, Alan, David Edge, Tobias Capwell, and Stefanie Tschegg, ‘A Technical Note on

the Armour and Equipment for Jousting,’ Gladius: Estudios sobre armas antiguas, arte

militar y vida cultural en oriente y occidente, 32 (2012), 139-184

Williams, Gerhild S., ‘The Arthurian Model in Emperor Maximilian's Autobiographic

Writings Weisskunig and Theuerdank’, The Sixteenth Century Journal, 11 (1980), 3-22

Young, Alan, Tudor and Jacobean Tournaments (London: George Philip, 1987)

—— ‘The Emblem in Tournaments’, in Companion to Emblem Studies, ed. by Peter Daly (New

York: AMS Press, 2008), pp. 477-488

Zajic, Andreas H., ‘Repräsentation durch Inschriftenträger. Symbolische Kommunikation und

Integration des Adels zwischen Hof und Grundherrschaft in den beiden

österreichischen Erzherzogtümern im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert’, in Symbolische Interaktion

in der Residenzstadt des Spätmittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit, ed. by Gerrit Deutschländer,

Marc Höh, and Andreas Ranft (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), pp. 129-170

Ziegeler, Hans-Joachim, ‘Beobachtungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte von Kaiser Maximilians

Theuerdank’, in Maximilians Ruhmeswerk: Künste und Wissenschaften im Umkreis Kaiser

303

Maximilians I, ed. by Jan-Dirk Müller and Hans-Joachim Ziegeler (Berlin: De Gruyter,

2015), pp. 211-54.

Exhibition Catalogues

Charles the Bold: Splendour of Burgundy, ed. by Susan Marti, Till-Holger Borchert, and Gabriele

Keck (Belgium: Mercatorfonds, 2009)

Emperor Maximilian I and the Age of Dürer, ed. by Eva Michel and Maria Luise Sternath (Munich:

Prestel, 2012)

Imagining the Past in France: History in Manuscript Painting, 1250-1500, ed. by Elizabeth Morrison

and Anne D. Hedeman (Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2010)

Kaiser Maximilian I.: Bewahrer und Reformer, ed. by Georg Schmidt-von Rhein (Ramstein:

Paqué, 2002)

Kaiser Maximilian I: Der letzte Ritter und das höfische Turnier, ed. by Sabine Haag, Alfried

Wieczorek, Matthias Pfaffenbichler, and Hans-Jürgen Buderer (Regensburg: Schnell &

Steiner, 2014)

Maximilian I: Der Aufstieg eines Kaisers, von seiner Geburt bis zur Alleinherrschaft 1459-1493, ed. by

Norbert Koppensteiner and others (Wiener Neustadt: Stadtmuseum, 2000)

Maximilian I, 1459-1519: Ausstellung/ Österrischische Nationalbibliothek, Graphische Sammlung

Albertina, Kunsthistorisches Museum (Waffensamlung), 23 Mai bis 30 September 1959 (Vienna:

Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, 1959)

Ritter! Traum & Wirklichkeit, ed. by Sabine Haag (Innsbruck: Schloss Ambras, 2013)

Ritterturnier: Geschichte einer Festkultur, ed. by Peter Jezler, Peter Niederhäuser, and Elke Jezler

(Luzern: Quaternio, 2014)

304

Ritterwelten im Spätmittelalter: Höfisch-ritterliche Kultur der Reichen Herzöge von Bayern-Landshut, ed.

by Franz Niehoff (Landshut: Museen der Stadt Landshut, 2009)

Reference Works

Bibliographie der Habsburg-Literatur: 1218-1934, ed. by Johann Kertész (Budapest: R. Gergely

Verlag, 1934)

Brooke, Kenneth, An Introduction to Early New High German (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1955)

Neue Deutsche Biographie, ed. by Historische Kommission, Bayerische Akademie der

Wissenschaften, 25 vols (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1953-present)

Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm, 16 vols (Leipzig: 1854-1961)

Scholz-Williams, Gerhild, The Literary World of Maximilian I: An Annotated Bibliography (St

Louis: Center for Reformation Research, 1982)

Stone, George Cameron, A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armour

(New York: Jack Brussel, 1961)

Thomas, Bruno and Ortwin Gamber, Katalog der Leibrüstkammer: I. Teil, der Zeitraum von 500

bis 1530 (Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum, 1976)